Red Wings: "No Fair!"

Is oo upset dat de mean old NHL make oo miss one widdle game? Is not fair that NHL punish best team in NHL for not sending no one to stoopid poopy All Star game. No fair. Who cares stoopid Sidney Crosby still go and wave to fans. Widstrom and Datsyuk so tired dey can't even stand up and wave to fans for tirty seconds. And mean old NHL make dem miss one game. Stoopid fans care about All-Star game. Stoopid NHL. Poop.

In Defense of All-Star Games

ESPN take note: the world does not revolve around basketball.

With that off my chest, I would like to offer my support for what we watched last night. It was, probably, the most exciting All-Star game I've ever seen. Perhaps that's because of my own slanted opinions about Montreal, but it seems the atmosphere was electric this weekend. This was a great opportunity for the game to be showcased for fans and casual observers alike (ESPN, you missed a good one. Oh wait: No defense, juke and jiving showing off; I guess that's your typical NBA game). In fact, the NHL could probably learn a thing or two about itself from this weekend. Case in point: Montreal seems to make a much better venue for an All-Star weekend than, say, last year's yawner in Atlanta. Or that Alex Ovechkin is a MUCH better ambassador for the game than Sidney Crosby could ever hope to be.


Given all of that, I wouldn't change a thing about the All-Star game. I fully support the league's decision to punish teams that refuse to send representatives. I love that each team gets a player in the All-Star game. Back in the bad old days in the late 90's when the playoffs were out of reach halfway through the season, I still took some satisfaction and pride in seeing at least one Canadien at the All-Star game. I would be pulling for him during the skills competition, and would root for a good performance at the game. Of course, there is the argument that the All-Star game should have only the absolute best players around. This would perhaps make it more representative of the NHL's best talent, but not representative of the league. This is a league-wide activity, and each team DESERVES to see one of their own on the roster. More to the point, the FANS deserve to see at least one of their guys there. They pay good money for their center-ice packages and their team sweaters, and the league owes them at least the minor satisfaction of seeing one of their guys in an All-Star jersey.

The Red Wings should consider themselves extremely fortunate that the League doesn't do it the way they used to, when the defending Stanley Cup champions would play the rest of the league's best players. As it is, I can understand why the Wings wanted to give their players a rest, but to remove them entirely is a disservice to the fans. When the Stanley Cup champions refuse to send even one representative to a game where EVERY OTHER TEAM has sent one, it smacks of arrogance. It says, "We're better than the rest of the league, and we don't have to be part of this bullshit." Believe me, I know that Nick Lidstrom and Pavel Datsyuk need some rest. But the Wings have only themselves to blame for sitting out the two for the All-Star game, but not for a regular-season game. THAT tells everyone that Detroit feels the All-Star game is a waste of time.

Personal bias aside, Sidney Crosby respected the fans enough to at least SHOW UP. He knows the fans who voted him in don't consider this a waste of time. Are Datsyuk and Lidstrom so worn out they can't stand up and wave to a crowd for 30 seconds? If that's the case, I think they need more than just a weekend off.

And for this fan, the All-Star game is not a waste of time. I have always loved seeing "les boys" at the game and last night was wonderful. I was cheering for Price, even though I expected him to get shelled. I cheered when Markov got a goal, and was going nuts during overtime and in the shootout when Kovalev made his bid for MVP.

It was awesome to see the rivalry between Boston and Montreal played out in watching Kovalev go head-to-head with Tim Thomas, without the pressure of regular-season standings riding on the outcome. It was meaningful, but it was still allowed to be fun. This is the time when we can remind ourselves that we are all fans of the game. Captain Sparrow and Icebuddy will no doubt be giving me hell for Thomas stoning Kovy, and we can joke about it.

I like things the way they are. I don't want to see home-ice riding on this game. This is a time for the players to enjoy themselves, and give the fans some enjoyment as well. I think that's the point of the All-Star game. EVERYBODY wins. It's like our own NHL Special Olympics. It doesn't matter if you're a depressed Thrashers fan--you get to see Kovalchuk play with the best in the world. It doesn't matter if you really really hate the Bruins--Kovalev would not have won the MVP award without the help of Tim Thomas.

This is our game, the fans' game. I like that we get to vote in the starters. After all, we all get to see at least one of our guys there anyway, so what's the difference? There are folks who say that it was unfair that Montreal fans stuffed the ballot box for the Habs. Well, this doesn't happen every year. In years past, we were considered lucky to get one guy there at all. So enough already. This was an exciting year to have an All-Star game. Next year we won't have one because of the Olympics, and the following year they're talking about Phoenix or Carolina. Provided Phoenix even has a team by then, do you think that game will have one-tenth of the excitement? That excitement was generated by fans who care about their team and their sport.

All those who whine about the All-Star game should watch the third period, overtime and shootout from last night. They should listen to the fans who packed the stands, who roared for Ovechkin, who turned all "Rocky IV" on Tim Thomas, and who made the Bell Centre shake when Kovalev was named MVP. That was not a waste of time. That was an event that was worth while; one I will remember for a long time.

Mesdames et Messieurs, your All-Star Game MVP:

Oh. Wait, that's me and my cousin. My bad. But for now, that's close enough. I'm proud of Kovy, and really enjoyed last night's game. More on that to follow soon.

Deal? Or no deal?

I have not posted on here in a while but the recent kevin Dupont article written in the Boston Globe had me thinking. The Tampa Bay Lightening will almost 100% likely make Vincent Lecavalier available at the trade deadline this season. The two top candidates that are rumored around to be looking for his services: he Montreal Canadiens and the Boston Bruins. But when thinking about it would you really want "your" team to make the deal?

Think long and hard about this one. Think of the type of player that you will be getting in Vinny Lecavalier. A true franchisee player. No one of this caliber has been moved since the 2005 debacle that Bruins fans remember as "Black Wednesday" (November 30, 2005 - I remember it like it was yesterday), when Joe Thornton was traded from the Black and Gold to the San Jose Sharks in exchange for Marco Sturm, Brad Stuart, Wayne Primeau, and a couple of one piece composite sticks. I realize that Marian Hossa was moved last year at the deadline but he is no where near the type of impact player that Thornton and Lecavalier are.

But before you jump the gun here, throw all of your eggs into the basket, and ask "where do I sign?", here are a few things to consider. First, the size of the contract that Vinny is about to enter, an 11-year, $85 million deal. The cap hit comes to $7.72 million a season, with years 10 and 11 only coming in at about $1.5 million and $1 million. But let's not forget that when years 10 and 11 do come around, he will be at a ripe young age of 39 and 40 years old.

Next, think about what it is going to take to get a player of this caliber. Unless your former Bruins GM Mike O'Connell, your not going to just take this years scrubs, a couple draft picks and call it a day. Your going to want young, proven NHL talent, along with additional draft picks to rebuild, which the Tampa Bay Lightening surely need to do.

Did I mention that the talent that you would have to give up would almost definitely have to be salary cap friendly? If the Lightening are going to be rebuilding and getting out of bad salary contracts, then why the hell would they want your bad contracts? Young, proven, salary friendly, impact players. Are you ready to part ways with that?

I'm sure as hell not. Think about the strain Vincent Lecavalier's contract will put on your team in the salary cap NHL, to sign your young impact players. I would much rather use that money in order to sign David Krejci (who I think is going to be a bon-a-fide superstar on this team for year's to come), Milan Lucic (my favorite player), Phil Kessel, Blake Wheeler, Tuuka Rask, etc. These guys may not turn into Vincent Lecavalier but they are all going to be damn good players. Depth is what wins championships in the NHL. Ask Vincent Lacavalier how he is making out right now with crap around him.

I also don't want the Bruins to enter a bidding war with the Habs for Lecavalier a la the New York Yankees and the Boston Red Sox. If Montreal wants to part ways with its future and cap themselves with this contract, then go right ahead. As well as my team is playing right now, I do not want them to break up the core nucleus of this team to make a heavy run this season. I don't want a one and done. You have something great going right now that every other NHL team looks to build. I do not want this team to sacrifice the future just to keep the Habs from getting Vinny. I would rather see a deal made for a Keith Tkachuk type that wont cost much and can add a little offensive punch.

Sure Vincent Lecavalier will sell a lot of jerseys for my home team, but he doesn't guarantee a cup - the thing every NHL fan covets.

I'd like to get a Canadiens fan perspective on this topic.

Habs-Bruins post game

It's one thing to dislike a player (Zdeno Chara, Tim Thomas). It's quite another to hate them and then watch them play outstanding hockey. THAT is infuriating.

Capt. Sparrow was right; Boston has a wicked good forecheck. The Bruins are obviously well-coached, and the players believe in their system. Kind of makes me wonder if Bob Gainey is regretting his decision to fire Julien in favor of a glorified captain whose idea of good coaching is playing mad scientist with line combinations. If Claude Julien doesn't win coach of the year, there is no justice in the universe.

In any case, what had me impressed the most last night was Chara's improvement. In all fairness, Chara should have been a forward, as he has a great nose for the net, hits well, and has a great shot. What Julien has done has been to turn Chara into a competent DEFENSEman, as he can now also make defensive plays, and doesn't cause heart attacks for Bruins fans every time he handles the puck in his own end. He dominated last night, in both ends.

What can I say about Tim Thomas? With his face on the ice, he reached up in the air and made a glove save that sealed the Boston win. He makes saves he has no business making. In all honesty I hate him for it, but I can understand why fans find it exciting. As long as he continues to make those ridiculous saves, he deserves to be considered one of the league's best goaltenders.

As I predicted, the power play was a major factor last night. Boston executed, Montreal did not, and that was the game. I do ask this in all fairness though: was Aaron Ward REALLY hurt by that hit? Andrei Kostitsyn hits about as hard as a lukewarm cup of tea, and the hit wasn't completely from behind. I refuse to blame the loss on that penalty though. Hamrlik was stupid to take the ensuing cross-checking penalty, and Montreal's penalty kill did not do its job.

So Boston has won the last three games against Montreal, and are TWELVE points ahead of them in the Northeast. That's only a six game difference, so the disparity isn't quite as wide as it would seem. But, Boston keeps rolling, and the days of Montreal's domination over the Bruins are over. I really do like it when traditional teams do well, and it's even more palatable that I don't actually have to be in Boston for it.

Sorry about all the backhanded compliments to the Bruins. They really are playing great hockey right now.

Habs-Bruins preview

So. It's been a while since these two teams met. Since then, Boston has gone on an impressive tear to become the best team in the Eastern Conference. With only ONE LOSS in the entire month of December, the Bruins seem unstoppable. Considering that the Bruins embarrassed the Habs the last time they played, Montreal fans should be worried.

Montreal finds itself comfortably in playoff position, with a better record now than at this same time last year. The Habs have won four straight, despite injuries to Alex Tanguay, Saku Koivu, Chris Higgins, and Carey Price. Georges Laraque, while not essential, could benefit Montreal in a phyisical game against Boston.

Speaking of which, Milan Lucic has been day-to-day, but the smart money is on him playing tomorrow. It will be interesting to see him renew hostilities with Mike Komisarek, especially now that he does not have to worry about ducking Laraque. Another key player for Boston will be Michael Ryder, who has once again flourished under his old coach Claude Julien. (All evidence for Ryder's slump last year seems to point to Guy Carbonneau's shortcomings as a coach.) David Krejci rounds out the list of key Boston players.

On the other side, Montreal's Alex Kovalev has started to heat up, along with the Habs' power play. Actually, the entire Montreal power play is the key "player" to watch tomorrow, as it has been getting better, and could make the difference. Komisarek has returned after injuring his shoulder in an ill-advised fight with Lucic, and there is obviously no love lost between the two. Boston has Lucic; watch for Maxim Lapierre to be on the ice antagonizing the Bruins' top players. He is centering a very hot third line at the moment, and Carbonneau will probably use him against Boston's best.


Now for a bit of editorializing/baiting/discussion:
What is the cause of the Bruins' success?

Marc Savard's continued growth is certainly one reason, along with the acquisition of Michael Ryder and the chemistry he has forged with David Krejci. Phil Kessel continues to grow into his role, and Lucic has brought excitement back for the fans.

A puzzling aspect is Boston's defense, which has remained largely the same since last year. Zdeno Chara is still woefully incompetent with the puck in his own end, and Andrew Ference, Shane Hnidy, Matt Hunwick, Matt Lashoff, Mark Stuart, Dennis Wideman, and Aaron Ward round out what would otherwise be a group of very average defensemen.

Another puzzling part of the picture is Boston's goaltending. Tim Thomas has a 2.08 GAA and .933 save percentage, which defy explanation. Thomas (and most Boston fans would agree) has atrocious positioning and lacks basic fundamentals. Yet, Like Dominic Hasek, he makes the save, no matter how ugly. Alternately, Manny Fernandez has almost identical numbers. His success has come as a surprise to many, as he had previously spent his time in Boston watching from the press box with one injury or another. Both goalies are 34 years old, which would suggest that their best years are behind them.

I haven't watched any Boston games since the last debacle against Montreal (one can only take so much of Jack Edwards), so I am eager to see what makes this team tick.
All I can say is, I am grateful that I left the Boston area prior to this sudden explosion of success from the Bruins. The real question now is, how long will it last? Boston does have Tukka Rask waiting in the wings, and he should be ready by the time Thomas and Fernandez (inevitably) falter. Boston's forwards are good, and will probably get even better, but the defensemen leave me scratching my head, trying to figure out how they have been succesful.

A note on pronunciations

Pierre McGuire is the worst offender, but there are many others as well who simply try too hard to pronounce French-Canadian names. Here's a hint: if you have trouble pronouncing it the French way, don't bother trying.

I'm sure I'm not the only one cringes every time he hears Latendresse pronounced "lah-tawn-dtlesss." It's ok guys, really, you can call him la-ten-dress, without any pseudo-French accents or extra syllables. I'm sure he won't mind.

There was some debate about how to pronounce Huet last year. Some called him "hewwww-ette", while others just stuck with what came naturally (hue-eh). I don't think there's anything quite as cringe-inducing (other than the blood-curdling anguish of a Ric Jeanerette "SCOOOOOOOOOGHGHHGGHGGHHHHHHHHHHR-cough-cough-hack-wheeze-RRRRRRRRRRRR" call) as an announcer trying desperately hard to pronounce a French name in an accent that no race on earth has ever used.
So, announcers, do us all a favor. Just say the word the way it looks, and don't worry about how it's pronounced. If you aren't sure, guessing about what constitutes an authentic French pronunciation will not help.

Of course, on the flip side of the coin, we have Don Cherry, with his intentional bastardizations of players names, such as Seiko Koivo, or Alex Korvalov. Cherry gets off on mis-pronouncing foreign names, as he is a racist, jingoistic blow-hard who enjoys causing trouble.* Also, folks like the aforementioned Jeanerette make a mockery of themselves when they can't even pronounce their own players' names, like Jaroslav "Spaw-Chuck." Or Sam Rosen who still insists, 14 years later, that it's pronounced "Kovalov."

So, hell, which do you prefer? A ridiculous announcer using a fake accent, or a dumbass who reads the first few letters on the back of the jersey and then makes up the rest?


*But damn, he's entertaining.

Quick Question:

When did the Phoenix Coyotes start using the Greyhound Bus logo on their sweaters?