New Jersey finally pushed the CBA rule makers to their limits. By signing a contract that is almost guaranteed to not be completed the NHL did the right thing to step in and say no.

Of course that made people ask the simple question:

Why now?

The answer to this is probably that Kovalchuk’s contract is well over the 40 mark, a point where very few players continue to play (especially snipers who typically retire early: Bure, Naslund, Sundin).

Also, the NHL is aware Kovalchuk wanted $10M/year. If he plays 10-11 years and then retires, he’ll have that.

A Better Way?

Of course there is a much easier way of dealing with these contracts. That is to institute a “maximum salary cap hit” for long term SPC. Any contract year’s cap over 4 years would be subject to these maximums (that is to say a 36 year old signing a 4 year contract would not be impacted at all, but a 5 year contract would, but would only apply to the last year). Say $4M for players over 35, $2M for players over 37 and $1M for players over 39.

However the sum of the contract would still be the same, so the difference would be applied to the years there there is no maximum:

I’m sure others could see how it would affect players like Luongo and Hossa. But at least it would create a consistent system as opposed to this ad-hoc system full of surprises. All of the sudden these long terms contracts are worthless!

What will the NHL accept?

Obviously the Devils will go back the drawing board, however, I’m not sure how much cap space they can give up. I’m sure N.J and the NHL will take a lot about this over the next few days and a slightly modified contract will be approved (and this whole process will turn out to be a joke).

God trembles as he awaits Probert’s arrival in the the Kingdom of Heaven.

Probert will without doubt be remembered for his pugilistic artistry but he was a pretty darn good hockey player as well. He had to be if he was going to play in 935 games amassing 162 goals and 3300 penalty minutes over 16 years. He added a respectable 16 goals and 48 points in 81 games in the playoffs.

So the guy could play.

Unfortunately, as many hockey fans know, Probert fought demons off the ice battling with alcoholism and drugs.

Probert’s career coincided during my formative years as a sports fan. The 1980s in particular was a great era for all sports and hockey in particular. Probert was not only regarded as the premier fighter of his time but a respected as a person as well. He was an iconic figure with hockey’s hard core fan base. I never heard a story where Probert turned his back on a kid looking for an autograph.

Probert was among the last of what was to become a dying breed in hockey: The hockey fighter. When he fought you knew you were watching one of the all-time greats and we all understood, deep down, what he delivered was part of hockey lore. We can deny it all we want, but fans love the hockey fighter; for their reputations as being well liked to their honor code among each other. They were a cult within the hockey community.

Probert, truth be told, was a bloody legend around hockey circles.

Sports is loaded with tragedies and Probert is just the latest to enter its macabre hall.  

So, here is a compilation of all the saves/goals/shots etc. each goalie faced over the last 5 years (inc. playoffs). I may be missing some games, but there is a lot of data here. The “Cred” column is just adjusting the shot quality neutral save percentage based on number of shots faced (regressing to the mean).

EG = Expected Goals
G = Actual Goals
SQN = shot quality neutral save percentage
= 1- 0.0926*G /EG
SV% = real save percentage
= 1 – G / S

Note: The expected goals are adjusted for site based biased shot information.
Few things of note
- Save percentages over 0.920 are not really sustainable (8 goalies in 2010).
- I didn’t realize how good Hiller is.
- Raycroft is really bad (allowed almost 100 more goals than average)

I think I just made the case for Dino. There are plenty of players in the Hall, that if we were to apply and employ what it means to be a hall of famer – a player that clearly demonstrates dominance above his peers – like they do in baseball, wouldn’t make the cut.

Hockey’s Hall of Fame is just that, it allows a certain amount of flexibility for players who didn’t quite dominate but put in a good career. Classic case is Mike Gartner. Indeed, Gartner is a tough file to wrestle with. His wicked constant stream of goals led him not to 600 goals but 708. It’s pretty hard to deny a player hitting that mark even if they didn’t dominate.

Then again, is it?

Eight 40 plus and one 50 goal season (with one 100 point season) in 15 years in succession is impressive on its own, but measured against his peers it was, you know, less so.  It’s still not enough. I don’t want to hear anything about character and what he did to trim his moustache. Nor does the fact this player, as it’s been said of Ciccarelli, played “poorly defensively” make any sense whatsoever. How do you even begin to put that into a competent or coherent formula? What, does winning the Selke make you a dominant player? Unless you’re winning the Art Ross alongside that Selke, it’s not much of an argument.

 That’s more of an intangible issue. I want to stay strictly on the DOMINANT theme.

Length of time really isn’t a measure of greatness. Call it the Alex Delvecchio effect. If you’re an above average player like Gartner and Delvecchio were, you’re bound to hit some substantial numbers.

In fact, on a goals per game basis Gartner clocks in at a meager .494 gpg. If you’re to pull out the top 100 goals scorers ever he wouldn’t make the top 10; or even 20 perhaps. I use goals because that’s the primary reason why Gartner got in. Not because he won any major awards like the Art Ross or Hart trophy. He doesn’t even have any 1st or 2nd all-star selections.

If there’s a poster boy for getting in for having a solid career without dominating he’s it.

Another player in the Hall is Glenn Anderson. The Anderson comparison is relevant for two reasons. One, it removes the “bad boy” argument against Dino and two, his stats are also similar to Ciccarelli.

Anderson’s off ice issues is well known. It may have delayed his induction but he’s in now. I’m off the opinion a player should be in based on the strength of their body of work on the ice. Period. HHOF official criteria notwithstanding. Why complicate things with abstract notions of “morality” and “character?” If we were to scrutinize many athletes for off ice behavior, the list of inductees would be thin indeed.

The former Edmonton Oilers great has the most annoying stats in pro sports: 498 goals , 1099 points. Couldn’t anyone have signed him for a couple of more games to, you know, round up those numbers? Sheesh. Anyway, that works out to .441 gpg and .973 ppg. Like Gartner, Anderson has no all-star selections and no major trophies. Absolutely, he had a remarkable knack to score big playoff goals – he’s 4th all-time in playoff points behind his Oilers contemporaries Wayne Gretzky, Mark Messier and Jari Kurri -  but again, no Conn Smythe for his troubles.

Still, Anderson has something none of the concerns have: Five Stanley Cup rings.

 Which brings me to Dino Ciccarelli.

His stats summarized look like this: Two 50 plus, four 40 plus, 2 one hundred point seasons. Productively, he was slightly better than Gartner. In fact, their numbers are similar. If 700 can’t deny you entry, then 600 is pretty darn close. Moreover, since we’re at it, Ciccarelli was a top 10 scorer twice in his career to Gartner’s one. Again, no major trophies but he sure could play with a meanstreak; sorta like Anderson.

As irony would have it, Ciccarelli’s gpg avg. is exactly .494. The same as you know who. And if you don’t, you haven’t been reading.  His ppg is .973. The same as one Glenn Anderson. 

Statistically, there’s little rationale to keep Ciccarelli out.

However, the point is, did Gartner, Anderson and Ciccarelli DOMINATE their peers? The answer is no. Judging by their careers, with a few differences here and there, either you lump them in together or you don’t. Personally, as great as these players were – and they really were – I don’t think they were “Hall” worthy if we were to be really, really strict about it like they are in baseball.

But hey. That’s me.

Taw, taw.

Commissioner hands cup to captain of team. Player hoists cup and shouts, “wooo!”

Then he passes it off to a player, one who is usually held in high regard like a veteran playing for his 12th team, who then holds it up and screams, “wooo!” In lockstep with tradition the next player in line grabs the silver sucker and raises it over his head and yelps with a few extra ‘o’s', “wooooooooo!” The next guy is more original and goes with a ”yeah!” before reverting back to, “woo!” Next! “Woo-wooo!” And next, “fuck! woooo!”

Player 7 – Woooooo! Woo!

Player 8 – Wooooo!

Player 9 – Fuck!

Player 10 – Yeah! Wooooooooooooooooooooooo!”

And so on. In a successive series of woos, by the time the we get around to the 10th player the mute button goes on.

WOOO!

***

Post-game interview.

Interviewer: How do you feel right now?”

Player: Numb.

Interviewer: You’re body still hasn’t registered the victory?

Player: Huh? No, really. I’m numb. I took a special rhino tranquilizer to calm me before the OT.”

Interviewer: For all the folks back home, who do you want to thank?

Player: Yo do realize I come from a nomadic tribe right? I don’t have anyone to reall thank “back home
 per se.

Interviewer: How about your father? Surely, you had many Timbits moments with him?

Player: What the fuck is a Timbit?

Interviewer: Basically a tiny, round doughnut.

Player: Fuck that shit. I don’t digest doughnuts.

Interviewer: What about your mom?

Player: If you bothered to do a player profile on me you’d know I’m an orphan. I alone went to 7am practices. I was the kid parents always felt sorry for.

Interviewer: Any of those parents take you under their wing?

Player: No. I was a loner. I read gun and knife magazines.

Interviewer: What will you do next?

Player: Not sure. I may just head out and call an escort.

Interviewer: Congratulations.

Player: For what?

Interviewer: For winning the cup?

Player: Please. It’s just a stupid fucken trophy. I prefer holding up a moose or caribou head. Can I go now? This is lame.

Interviewer: Over to you Mike!”

1961 was the last triumph for Chicago. It could have been 1971 but the Montreal Canadiens came out of nowhere and siphoned the Stanley Cup away from the powerful Hawks – then known as the Black Hawks (two words).

In 1992 they reached the finals but ran into Mario Lemieux and the Pittsburgh Penguins and were summarily dismissed that year.

Everything changed in 2010 and the few years prior leading to the victory. You know, drafting stars like Patrick Kane and Jonathan Toews. They’ve cultivated and crafted a wicked good team with the likes of Patrick Sharp, Dustin Byfuglien, Kris Versteeg, Brent Seabrook and Duncan Keith to name a few.

The scary thing is that while pundits justifiably talk up Sidney Crosby and the Penguins as well as Alex Ovechkin and the Washington Capitals as possible perennial contenders for the cup in the next few years, the Blackhawks can easily be included in that group. Most of its roster is signed and sedentary in Chicago thus giving them the stability needed to make a run at a few Cups.

As for Jonathan Toews, has there been a better player all year in all competitions than the captain? I can’t think of one. He may not have statistically dominated the series but he more than made up for it in his overall play. A deserved Conn Smyhe winner. Sure, a case could have been made for Byfuglien or Keith, but Toews is the heart, soul and engine on a squad filled with talent and character.

Toews finished one point behind Flyers forward Daniel Briere  in overall playoff scoring with 7 goals and 22 assists. Had the Flyers managed another miracle, Briere’s 12 goals and 18 assists could very well have made him the Conn Smythe winner.

Crass but...funny

It’s always difficult to put a positive spin on a loss but the Philadelphia Flyers were a model of how not to give up under any circumstances for all sports teams to emulate. Yes, they were a 7th seed and yes they did erase a 0-3/0-3 deficit against the Boston Bruins, but we shouldn’t neglect the fact that at the beginning of the year this team was slotted to reach the finals if not win the “most recognizable” trophy in all of North American pro sports.

The Flyers had depth and they had the desire to drive through their opponents. Sure, much will be made about the lack of production between Mike Richards, Jeff Carter and even Simon Gagne, however this was, all things considered, a great year for the Flyers. They should be a team to be reckoned with next season. Although it may involve no Chris “Chrissy” Pronger.  Incidentally, I know many in the media have dismissed the Pronger joke in the Chicago Tribune as sexist, personally, I think we’re way too sensitive. I don’t like my sports being PC.

Since their last Stanley Cup in 1975, the Flyers have reached the finals six times losing each and every time to the Montreal Canadiens (1976) , New York Islanders (1980), Edmonton Oilers (1985 and 1987), Detroit Red Wings (1997) and now Chicago Black Hawks in 2010.

And so ends another year, off with the beards and now we turn our attention to what’s left of the NBA finals and the World Cup. 

For Chicago:

For Philly. It’ll come. But gosh, would it have killed you guys to cheer your team for their effort, blood, sweat and guts?:

CHI   PHI # G EG S%   G EG SV% Game 1: 6 3.2 83.9 5 3.1 81.3 Game 2: 2 2.3 96.4 1 2.8 91.3 Series [2-0] 8 5.5 89.8 6 5.9 85.5

Philadelphia is doing a lot better than I would have anticipated. If it wasn’t for the difference in goaltending this series could easily be tied (or have gone the other way).

CHI PHI Winner Even Strength GF 2.9 2.44 EGF 2.83 2.78 GA 2.35 2.43 EGA 2.19 2.53 SV% 89.2% 90.4% Power Play GF 6.54 6.64 EGF 6.55 8.69 GA 0.49 2.42 EGA 0.6 0.8 SV% 92.3% 89.6%

Chicago returns to the finals for the first time since 1992 in search of recapturing a trophy last conquered in 1961 when Bobby Hull, Tony Esposito, Pierre Pilote and Stan Makita ruled the ice. The last time, incidentally, Chicago hockey fans witnessed a powerhouse.

Happy Hawk legends Hull and Makita

Yet, not even those powerful Hawks teams of the 1960s and 1970s, it is argued, measure up to the depth and talent of the current generation largely built through the draft and led by Jonathan Toews, Patrick Kane and Duncan Keith. With a supporting cast that includes the under rated Patrick Sharp, sniper Marion Hossa, bulldozer Dustin Byfuglien (pronounced Buff-lin for some reason) and Brent Seabrook, the Blackhawks surprisingly swept a very good San Jose Sharks team in the Western conference finals.

In addition, a major reason for the team’s success has to be the unlikely emergence of goaltender Antti Niemi. Niemi and Cristobal Huet started out platooning goalie duties but Niemi slowly won the starting job and heading into the finals has posted a .921 save percentage in the playoffs.

If the Blackhawks were expected guests in the NHL finals, so too were the Philadelphia Flyers. At the start of season one was hard pressed to not find an expert who didn’t believe they were a solid favorite in the Eastern conference. Instead, the Flyers struggled most of the season. So much so they  fired coach John Stevens along the way. It didn’t get much better under new head coach Peter Laviolette ( a former Stanley Cup winner with the Carolina Hurricanes in 2006) as they literally limped and staggered their way into the playoffs and the seventh spot thanks to a shoot out win, of all things, over the New York Rangers on the last day of the season. Next thing you know, whoa, the Flyers find themselves in the finals; something they haven’t tasted since 1997.

And like the Hawks with Niemi, an unlikely source for has been the revelation known as Michael Leighton. A journeyman for most of his career, Leighton actually played in 27 regular season winning 16 before going down with an injury. Like hurricanes are a fact of life in southern U.S. states, goaltending woes have been a part of the Flyers landscape for quite sometimes.

Parent and Broadstreet Bullies terrorized hockey in the 70s

Not since the great Bernie Parent who helped lead the Flyers - along with Bobby Clarke, Reggie Leach and Bill Barber - to back t0 back titles in the mid 1970s, has the team really had a franchise goalie. Pelle Lindbergh was tagged to be one but was tragically killed in an automobile accident in the early 1980s and Ron Hextall was a solid goalie but not quite considered elite. It got to a point where they signed basket-headcase Ray Emery.

Despite a checkered goalie past, with Leighton (and Brian Boucher who up until his own injury was the number one goalie) the Flyers have found success and if they managed to their first Cup since 1975, it won’t matter.

Which made me wonder about goaltending. We tend to over blow the importance of goaltending. Relax. Let me explain. Of course, out of all the pro sports, the hockey goalie is perhaps the most important; probably more so than the football Quarterback or baseball pitcher. My argument is less about that fact and more about how in reality a team can achieve success with competent, as opposed to ethereal, goaltending.

There aren’t and haven’t been many what we characterize as “franchise” goalies in history. Billy Smith backstopped the New York Islanders dynasty while the Edmonton Oilers had Grant Fuhr in nets. The Detroit Red Wings mini-dynasty succeeded with first Mike Vernon and then Chris Osgood. While all have proven to be excellent goalies capable of anchoring championship teams, none are considered elite in the Martin Brodeur, Dominik Hasek or Patrick Roy mould.

Hacker Smith: 4 Stanley Cups to his name

Dominik Hasek is perhaps statistically the greatest goalie ever and he never played for a dynasty.  Same with another dominant goalie, Ed Belfour.  A goalie is a part of a team and no matter how great or mediocre, success is predicated on other factors such as organizational standards, coaching and team mates dedicated to winning. You can stop all the pucks you want but if the team in front of you is not committed it’s bye-bye time. It makes little sense to tie up so much money in one player who can’t score goals.

Moreover, if we take a glimpse at the teams who have won in the last, say, 15 years or so, very few have won with “elite” goaltenders.  The Tampa Bay Lightning won with Nikolai Khabbibulin. Carolina Hurricanes – under Laviolette – won with Cam Ward. Anaheim Ducks with Jean-Sebatien Giguere and Pittsburgh Penguins with Marc-Andre Fleury.

All solid goalies with some repute but are any classified as the best among their peers? In fact, Vancouver Canucks goalie Roberto Luongo gets more attention and accolades and he’s yet to win a cup.

That’s why I tend to ignore pundits talk as if Niemi and Leighton are flukes. Winning is often a fluke in any sport. Besides, who effen cares as long as they get the job done. Why get caught up in all the “he came out of nowhere ergo he won’t last” shtick? I mean, Leighton has a whopping .948 save percentage! What more do people want? Sometimes living and playing in the now has equal if not greater value.

It’s a dilemma the Montreal Canadiens find themselves in with Jaroslav Halak  (who posted the second highest winning percentage at .923 in the playoffs) who proved he can be a number one and Carey Price. I don’t think keeping both is a realistic option since each fancies themself too be a starter. Montreal has to pick who they feel gives them a better chance at winning down the road. How they will determin this I don’t know.

Last but not least, some American sports commentators have mumbled that this final lacks star power. Perhaps to the outside, casual fan does but it can’t always be just about the “superstars.” Making it to the NHL finals involves two teams and winning the Stanley Cup is the hardest thing to do in pro sports. Sidney Crosby can’t be there every year and Alex Ovechkin still has yet to make it to the final. 

However, for my money, this series won’t be wanting of stardom. Jonathan Toews is a bona-fide star and probably had the best year of any player in the NHL. Patrick Kane is not too far behind. Duncan Keith is a Norris trophy finalist. Mike Richards is possibly the best two-way hockey player in the league if not the world. Jeff Carter has the potential to rise to stardom.

Add to this that these are two of the better known hockey brands with cool uniforms looking for a first triumph in 35 and 49 years it makes for one compelling showdown for any sports fan.

Still, I figured I should give it a shot and was able to pick out a winner. Without further ado, I present the NHLPA as the proud recepients of the Douchetard (s) award for this week  (or month).

Congratulations.

So why pick them? I was reading how the NHLPA decided to change the name of the Lester B. Pearson award to the Ted Lindsay award. While I’m not against having an award named after Lindsay (although Gordie Howe doesn’t have one), does it have to come at the expense of one that’s been around for around four decades?

What made me settled on the NHLPA was because of the secrecy to which they conducted their business. No explanation – any explanation – was forthcoming from them. To me that’s not cool. If you’re going to do something like this it may not be a bad idea to fricken have the balls to be open about it.

Hence, the NHLPA are douchetards for acting like the KGB or CIA.

The Montreal Canadiens and Philadelpia Flyers have only met six times in history (the Habs hold a 3-2 series edge) but despite the small sample size, it’s a rivalry by any measure.  I wanted to mark this occasion with one series in particular that remains stuck in my memory.

In 1989, the Canadiens eliminated the Flyers 4 games to 2 in a sick, intense, wild series. Chris Chelios had set the tone in the series after a dirty hit on Brian Propp early in the series. Listening to whiny Flyers fans still talk smack about the hit is comical given how proud they are of the Broadstreet Bullies and their lunatic antics. Incidentally, the could never intimidate the Habs and Boston Bruins of the 1970s. Just thought I’d throw that in there.

They say Bruce Springsteen saved rock and roll in 1975 with the landmark Born to Run album. One year after, people in hockey circles were saying the Canadiens saved hockey when they took out Philadelphia. It seems fans outside Philly had had enough of the Hanson brothers-like goonery.

Not to be outdone Ron Hextall pulls this classic madness out of his ass. As Philly fans littered the ice with garbage, a young Patrick Roy wasn’t helping matters by challenging Hextall, Flyers defenseman Kjell Samuelsson was doing is part to gang up on Bobby Smith (a wonderful smooth hockey player who deserves more credit for his play) while Craig Ludwig (hardly an angel himself) stepped in to help Smith out. Not seen in this video is when Smith was escorted off the ice to a shower of beers as he flashed a #1 gesture with his finger. I remember that very well. Good times.

Love Mats Naslund.

That these two franchises don’t like each other much is obvious. It’s a neat rivalry. One that doesn’t get too much attention. If they’d meet more often I think it would rank among the top rivalries in hockey.

I’d like to add one thing. The infamous pugilism of the Flyers of the 1970s has earned the franchise a reputation for hard-nosed, if not dirty hockey – a tag they carry proudly. Hey, you have to respect that. However, recent editions of this team hardly come close to that rap yet the media still write about them as though they’re the Broadstreet Bullies redux. I don’t see it. I see a team willing to shit disturb and does play physical hockey but the goonery seems no worse than other teams.