Showing posts with label red wings. Show all posts
Showing posts with label red wings. Show all posts

Monday, June 08, 2009

Just Sayin'...


The Penguins are 0-3 on Detroit ice.

Evgeni Malkin is 1-1-2, minus-3 in three games there.

Sidney Crosby doesn't have a point there and is minus-3 there.

Bill Guerin -- a late season pickup to provide some veteran leadership -- doesn't have a point there and is minus-2.

Chris Kunitz -- ditto -- doesn't have a point there and is minus-2.

Sergei Gonchar?... nope, no points at the Joe.

Jordan Staal?... nope.

Marc-Andre Fleury is 0-3 there with a GAA of 4.33 and a save percentage of .857 there.

This final might go to a Game 7, and Pittsburgh only has to win one game on Detroit ice if things get that far.

But it wouldn't be the way to bet.

Monday, June 01, 2009

Math Lesson


The last team to lose Games 1 and 2 on the road and win the Cup -- the Montreal Canadiens over the Chicago Blackhawks... 38 years ago.
And overall, it's 41 of 44 times (93.2 percent). These are not good numbers for folks of a black and Vegas gold persuasion.

Saturday, May 30, 2009

The Last Prognostication You'll Ever Need -- The Stanley Cup Final: Detroit vs. Pittsburgh


So here we are, right back where we were this time last year – Wings…Penguins.

Why Detroit can’t lose

They’ve seen it all. The Red Wings are in their fifth Stanley Cup final in the last 12 seasons. In the previous four appearances, they did not fail to win the Cup. It started in the 1996-1997 season. From that team, Nicklas Lidstrom, Tomas Holmstrom, Kris Draper, Kirk Maltby, and Chris Osgood remain. Lidstrom has 228 games of playoff experience entering these finals. Holmstrom, 145. Maltby, 162. Draper, 198. Osgood, 122 (19 with other teams). Compare this to Pittsburgh, where Bill Guerin leads all Penguins in playoff experience – 122 games. In the four Stanley Cup finals the Red Wings have played in the last 12 seasons, their game record is 16-3. Only once in eight tries have they lost either of Games 1 and Games 2 (an overtime loss to Carolina in Game 1 in 2002 – they won the next four games).

That’s the history. The fact is, Lidstrom, Holmstrom, Draper, Maltby, and even to an extent Osgood have not been the keys for this team. They are just so uncommonly deep. Six players with at least ten points in 16 playoff games, 15 with at least five. Only one skater among the 23 who have dressed for the Red Wings is in minus territory (Maltby, minus-2), and two are above plus-10, 11 are at least plus-5. Nine different players have game winning goals in the 12 wins so far in the playoffs. Ten different players have power play goals. No Red Wing who has taken at least 100 draws has lost more than he’s won. And, for a team with something of a reputation as being too “European,” they have more guys with 10-plus hits coming into this series in 16 games played (17) than Pittsburgh does in 17 games (15).

The Red Wings do the big things well – they score (3.69 Goals/game in the playoffs), they defend (2.12 goals/against), they have the largest goal differential by far (+1.57 goals/game, compared to 1.06 for Pittsburgh), they are best in five-on-five play, they have the third best power play (25.7 percent, compared to Pittsburgh at seventh with 19.3 percent), they get and hold a lead (they’ve won eight of nine games when scoring first, tops in winning percentage at .889), they don’t wilt late (9-0 in games in which they’ve led after two periods, tops in the playoffs).

They also do the little things well. They are second in faceoff winning percentage, second in shot differential per game, second in fewest penalty minutes per game. They have been out-shot only twice in 16 playoff games and have out-shot opponents by at least ten shots in ten of 16 games.

Oh, and then there is Marian Hossa – the guy who spurned a contract offer to remain in Pittsburgh to skate for the Red Wings. He is 10-32-42 in 32 career games against the Penguins. Pavel Datsyuk came into this season without having scored a goal against the Penguins in six career games. By the end of the season, he added two games of experience against the Penguins…and scored three goals.

Why Detroit can’t win

Detroit is banged up. Lidstrom, Draper, and Pavel Datsyuk have been banged up. Only Lidstrom will play in Game 1. Jonathan Ericsson is still recovering from an appendectomy; it’s uncertain whether he will play in Game 1. Add to this that Games 1 and 2 are being played back to back, and it has all the makings of the Red Wings getting out of the gate slowly at home. Losing one or both games on home ice could be death against a team that is 6-2 on its own home ice in the playoffs.

Then there is the matter of history. Last year, the Red Wings shutout the Penguins in Games 1 and 2 at Joe Louis Arena. Pittsburgh will be remembering that embarrassment.

Detroit had little difficulty with either Columbus or Chicago, both young teams with no playoff experience to speak of. They did struggle with Anaheim – a physical team, but also one with their own cadre of playoff warriors. Pittsburgh is young, but it is also a team that has played in 42 playoff games the last three years (including this one). And Pittsburgh has a lot more skill than do the Ducks.

The Peerless’ Player to Ponder

Johan Franzen

“The Mule” is the leading scorer for the Red Wings in this post season (10-9-19 in 16 games). However, his splits by series offer a warning. Against Columbus, he was 2-4-6, +4 in four games. Against Anaheim, he was 6-3-9, +3 in seven games. But against Chicago, he was 2-2-4, +2 in five games and had only one point (a goal) after Game 1. What’s the difference? Chicago is a much speedier team than either Columbus or Anaheim. Pittsburgh does not lack for speed and will make Franzen play in his own end more than he might against teams like Anaheim or Columbus. If that eats into his production at the other end, it will be trouble for the Red Wings.

Why Pittsburgh can’t lose

We’ve said it before, and it bears repeating – Sidney Crosby is on a mission. He has been held off the score sheet only twice in 17 games. He’s had multi-point games 11 times (the last three games in a row). He hasn’t had a minus game since Game 5 against Washington (the last time he was held scoreless). He’s won at least 50 percent of his draws in 12 of 17 games, including six times over 60 percent. Among players with at least five goals in the playoffs, he is fourth in shooting percentage with a whopping 22.2 percent. It goes on and on.

But then there is the matter of Evgeni Malkin. Since taking the collar against Washington in Game 4 of the conference semi-finals, Malkin is 7-8-15, +6 in seven games. As well as Crosby has played, if Malkin hadn’t come alive in game 5 of the Capitals series (he had the game-winner in overtime), going 1-6-7 in Games 5-7, we’re probably talking about a whole different opponent for the Red Wings in the finals.

But good as those two are, there are other stories. None is better for Penguin fans than that of Sergei Gonchar, who has skated in 15 playoff games, the last five on a knee that might need surgical repair after this last series is completed. Gonchar, not necessarily included among the “stitch it up and get me back out there” category of player, gritted in out in a four game series against a Carolina team whose speed could have made Gonchar’s life miserable. Instead, he skated for more than 20 minutes in three of four games in a Pittsburgh sweep. His experience on the blue line can only help against a team that seems always to have the puck.

While perhaps not as deep as the Red Wings in terms of production, the Penguins are not simply The Sid and Geno Show, either. Eight players have game-winning goals among the 12 wins so far, seven have power play goals. They also have six players with at least ten points in the playoffs. They have three players at plus-10 or better (to the Wings’ two).

Pittsburgh seems to have found another gear since Game 6 of the Washington series. In five games since losing that game in overtime, they have outscored opponents 26-11, outshot them 168-139, converted five of 21 power play opportunities, killed 11 of 12 shorthanded situations. Those 26 goals in their last five games – it is the most scoring they have had in any five-game stretch this season, regular season or playoffs.

Why Pittsburgh can’t win

Pittsburgh played three comparatively weak defensive teams in getting to the finals. Philadelphia, Washington, and Carolina all gave up at least 2.70 goals/game in the regular season. Detroit wasn’t any great shakes, either (2.93/game, tied with Washington for 19th). But oh, have the Red Wings turned things around. They have allowed only 2.12 goals/game – second among all playoff teams. The Penguins are certainly a step up in class for the Red Wings in terms of firepower, but the Red Wings are at least that on the defensive side for the Penguins – and, they’ve been here before.

Pittsburgh has out-shot opponents in 14 of 17 playoff games so far. But seven of those came in the Washington series against a team that struggled to get the puck out of their own end for long stretches (and still took the Penguins to seven games). If there is one team the Penguins have face that resembles the Red Wings in style, if not execution, it is Washington. Detroit does not have an Alex Ovechkin, but they do have a Pavel Datsyuk (even if gimpy) and a Henrik Zetterberg. And Detroit’s blue line will probably not struggle nearly so much as Washington did moving the puck in their own end.

The Peerless’ Player to Ponder

Bill Guerin

Guerin – a late season pick up from the Islanders – has already set a personal best for playoff scoring in a season (7-7-14 in 17 games). It is the first time he’s been in double-digit playoff scoring since 1995. His plus-11 is a personal playoff best and the first time he’s been in “plus” territory in the playoffs since that 1995 season. His two game-winning goals is a personal playoff best. He’s tied his playoff high for goals scored. He’s never taken more shots on goal than he has in this playoff year. The thing is, if he doesn’t keep up that pace, it isn’t likely the Penguins are going to win this series, even if Crosby and Malkin get theirs (which they seem likely to do).

We haven’t mentioned goaltending for either team. Frankly, we don’t see this as a “goaltender’s” series. That is a good thing for Pittsburgh, oddly enough. Chris Osgood, who struggled quite a bit in the regular season, has a better GAA (2.06 to 2.62), a better save percentage (.925 to .906), has more shutouts (one to none), and has fewer games in giving up three or more goals (three to four) than his counterpart, Marc-Andre Fleury. None of this is to disparage Fleury’s performance, thus far. He’s had a good playoff run. But Osgood’s numbers, while significantly better than those he posted in the regular season, are hardly a fluke, given his playoff history. Five times in his career, Osgood has played more than one playoff series in a season with the Red Wings. In those years, he has never had a GAA above 2.12, he has only once had a save percentage below .918 (and that was in 1996). He has a total of ten shutouts in those five years. For Osgood, the season seems to start in April. One could argue that Osgood’s numbers are a product of the team around him being so good. Well, that’s really the point – the Red Wings know how to play these games. That’s why they’re the defending champs, and until a team beats them, we think it folly to pick against them.

Detroit in 7

Thursday, May 28, 2009

Deja "but"



Last year, Capitals goalie Cristobal Huet was caught looking the wrong way with a puck loose in front of him, and his season was snuffed out as Joffrey Lupul stuffed it behind Huet in overtime to send the Philadelphia Flyers onward to the second round of the 2007-2008 playoffs.

Last night, it happened again. After having made a spectacluar right pad save on Johan Franzen while lying on his stomach late in regulation to keep Chicago's season alive, Huet got caught looking the wrong way in overtime once more, this time at his right post with Tomas Holmstrom on the doorstep. But the puck was on Darren Helm's stick on the other side of the crease, and Helm only had to bunt the puck the last few inches to seal Detroit's 2-1 overtime series-clinching win.


Wings/Blackhawks Photo by Claus Andersen/Getty Images

Sunday, May 17, 2009

Your Peerless Prognostos for the Western Conference Final -- Detroit (2) vs. Chicago (4)


And now, for the western half of the finals…

Why Detroit can’t lose…

Experience. Coming into these playoffs, the Chicago Blackhawks who have skated thus far in the post season had a total of 197 games of playoff experience among them, and 64 of that came from Samuel Pahlsson – a late season pick-up from Anaheim. For the Red Wings, defenseman Nicklas Lidstrom came in with 214 games of experience… himself. Of the 22 skaters for the Red Wings thus far in the playoffs, six had more than 100 games of playoff experience coming into this year's tournament (Lidstrom, Tomas Holmstrom, Brian Rafalski, Kirk Martby, Kris Draper, Chris Chelios).

Why Detroit can’t win…

Chicago has no fear of the Red Wings. They fought them to a draw in six regular season games (2-2-2) and won the last two contests of the season. And, there is the matter of the grueling seven-game series the Wings played against Anaheim, perhaps the most physical team in the final eight. If Chicago – a younger, high-octane team – can steal a win out of Detroit from the first two games, it might be just the crack the Blackhawks can exploit. Chicago certainly poses a different set of challenges for a team that had goaltending issues in the regular season – they can score goals (3.17/game in the regular season, 4th in the league). Chris Osgood wasn’t facing the 1984 Edmonton Oilers in the first two rounds. Anaheim finished 14th in scoring, Columbus finished 21st.

The Peerless’ Player to Ponder

Johan Franzen

Franzen scored more points against only one team (St. Louis) than he did against the Blackhawks in the regular season (3-2-5) in six games. He is the leading scorer for the Red Wings so far in the playoffs (8-7-15 in 11 games). He has the sort of size that can pose problems for the Blackhawks down the middle, and he has the hands to finish. He has points in 10 of 11 playoff games thus far. He hasn’t gone more than two consecutive games without a point since early January.

Why Chicago can’t lose…

No worries. They weren’t supposed to get this far, even as a fourth seed. And now, they get to skate. The first two rounds – against Calgary and Vancouver – were probably more physical than anything the Red Wings are likely to throw at them. And, the Blackhawks lit up two goaltenders that, on paper, are far higher in class than what they’ll face in Chris Osgood. 19 goals against Miikka Kipprsoff (3.52 GAA) and 21 against Roberto Luongo (also a 3.52 GAA). The Blackhawks can score with anybody.

Why Chicago can’t win…

They can’t score if they don’t have the puck. Detroit has allowed the third fewest shots on goal in the playoffs (27.5). Chicago is second, you say? Well, yes, they are. But what favors Detroit here is how they got to their number. Their shot differential of +12.7 is, by far, the best of any team advancing this far. This sort of thing has the effect of choking the life out of an opponent. In the last two seasons, the Red Wings have played nine games past Game 4 in a series. They are 6-3 in those games. Do the Blackhawks have the stuff to last?

The Peerless’ Player to Ponder

Nikolai Khabibulin

Among the goalies playing in the final eight, Khabibulin has the worst save percentage (.896, the only sub-.900 in the group). Good thing Chicago has allowed the second fewest shots on goal per game. Detroit will test Khabibulin in ways that Calgary and Vancouver didn’t. He had a superb save percentage against the Red Wings in three games this year (.932), but the Blackhawks allowed him to face 133 Red Wing shots in those games (39.7 shots-per-60 minutes). If Detroit is getting those kinds of shot totals in this series, it could spell doom for the Blackhawks, unless Khabibulin steps up his shot-blocking production.

In the end…

The young and the old – the Red Wings were the oldest team in the final eight, the Blackhawks were the youngest. Guess the questions are, “are the Blackhawks too young?” and “are the Red Wings too old?” Well, we don’t think it will come down to that. The common thread between these teams is that both have done very good jobs at masking otherwise pedestrian performances in goal, given the settings (yeah, Chris Osgood has a .921 save percentage, but we’re not thinking Columbus or Anaheim are offensive juggernauts, either). Both have managed to do it by their parsimonious allocation of opponents' shot opportunities. But Detroit’s result is more a product of the style of play they impose on games – keeping the puck and overwhelming teams with their own shot volumes (40.2/game is by far the highest total in the final eight).

This argues for Detroit being able to cobble together four wins faster as a product of the comfort level and consistency they have in playing the style they play. They will be better able to impose a style on games, even if the Blackhawks want to play an up-tempo pace of their own.

Detroit in 6

Saturday, May 16, 2009

The Long View

In 1986, the Detroit Red Wings won 17 games.

That isn’t a misprint, and it wasn’t an abbreviated season. The Red Wings won 17 games in an 80-game season. Their best player was a 20-year old who managed to dress for only 51 games that season. You might have heard of him – Steve Yzerman. But let’s leave him out of this conversation. We’re looking at teams, not players.

The Wings followed up that abysmal season with some wandering in the desert, achieving a level of mediocrity that saw them average 38 wins a year over the next nine seasons, making the playoffs eight times, but not winning a Cup and getting to a Cup final once.

Then in 1996 they won 62 games, to this day a franchise and league record. They also lost in the Western Conference final. One might call that “disappointing.” But in 13 seasons since, including that 62-win campaign, the Red Wings have reached the 50-win mark six times (the last four in a row), the 100-point threshold 11 times (the last nine in a row), and have won the Stanley Cup four times (this year’s outcome for a fifth still in doubt).

The Wings did it with an elite player subordinating personal statistics for team success (that Yzerman guy) and developing a system that identified talent, nurtured it, and sent it on a conveyor to the parent club that replenished it and made it a perennial championship contender, even when that Yzerman fellow hung up his skates.

*****

On November 19, 1983, the Edmonton Oilers defeated the New Jersey Devils, 13-4.

That’s not a misprint, either. The loss dropped the Devils to 2-18-0 on their way to their own 17-win season. It prompted the Oilers’ Wayne Gretzky to remark that “it's time they got their act together, they're ruining the whole league. They had better stop running a Mickey Mouse organization and put somebody on the ice.”

It took awhile. It would be nine more seasons before the Devils reached the 40-win mark in their history. But even doing that, it would be another two years before they would win their first Stanley Cup, in 1995. In the 14 seasons starting with that first Stanley Cup win , the Devils have had fewer than 40 wins once (not including the 22 wins in a 48-game season 1995 before winning the Cup). They’ve had fewer than 100 points only three times (not including that 1995 season), and they’ve won three Stanley Cups with another Stanley Cup finals appearance on top of that.

They did it by developing a system and building it around a player – a goaltender in this instance (Martin Brodeur) – making them one of the most consistent of teams over the past 15 years, one that is always mentioned among Stanley Cup contenders.

*****

In 1990, the Quebec Nordiques won 12 games.

Nope, not a misprint, and that was an 80-game season, too. If the New Jersey Devils were “Mickey Mouse,” it would be hard to find a cartoon character that could have accurately resembled the Nordiques. Shoot, they only won 16 games the next year and 20 the year after that. But after that 20-win season in 1992, the Nordiques consummated what is one of the biggest heists in trade in NHL history. They traded Eric Lindros to Philadelphia for five players, a first round draft pick, $15 million (when $15 million was real money in sports), and future considerations that might have included the future rights to Pat’s King of Steaks, for all we know.

Adding assets to a team that already included a 22-year old phenom by the name of “Sakic,” the Nordiques won 47 games the following year. But playoff success would be longer in coming. It took them three more years before they won a Stanley Cup (unfortunately for the fine people of Quebec, they did it in Colorado in their first year after having moved the franchise). But starting with that Stanley Cup year, they would win at least 40 games in 11 of the next 12 seasons, reached the Western Conference finals six times, and won two Stanley Cup. While their star appears to have faded, the Colorado Avalanche was also one of those teams on most experts’ short list of Stanley Cup contenders for a dozen seasons.

They did it by making a shrewd decision with respect to personnel when they were at their lowest. Joe Sakic and Peter Forsberg were the cornerstones of those perennial contenders from Denver (not to mention another move later – that for Montreal goaltender Patrick Roy).

*****

The point is that these things take time, even under the best of circumstances. A lot of experts, so-called, didn’t expect the Capitals to make the playoffs last year, especially after their awful start. That made making them something of a bonus and a playoff loss in the first round less painful. The team had the look of overachievers.

This year, the expectations brought on by that playoff performance in 2008 were higher – much higher. And that makes this year’s second round exit bitter in a way that last year’s wasn’t, tainted with the whiff of disappointment, of – yes – underachievement.

But this is a team two years removed from back-to-back 70-point seasons. Detroit waited 11 seasons after that 17-win debacle before winning a Cup. It took New Jersey 11 seasons to go from “Mickey Mouse” to the penthouse. It took Quebec six years and a move to Denver to win the prize. Folks forget that once upon a time, these teams were truly, epically, legendarily bad.

There aren’t any guarantees here. The Capitals could become the perennial disappointment that are the San Jose Sharks – a team of immense talent and promise that goes quick and quiet every spring. Or they could be the modern reincarnation of the St. Louis Blues that made the playoffs every year for a quarter century (from 1980 through 2004), but which never won a Cup and advanced to a conference final only once.

But there isn’t anything about this team to suggest that it will not be better next year, even with the difficult personnel decisions that lie ahead. The Caps have a good core group, they have role players who contribute, and they might have the deepest pool of goaltending prospects in the league. If these Caps realize their promise, build on their disappointments, and win a Stanley Cup (or two, or three) while being a perennial contender, these days – not to mention the 70-point seasons – will be a dim memory, if not forgotten all together.

Like that 17-win season for those Red Wings…

Friday, May 01, 2009

Your Peerless Prognostos for Round Two -- Detroit (1) vs. Anaheim (4)


Next up in this look at round two – Detroit and Anaheim…

Why Detroit can’t lose…

They’re better. They scored more (3.52 goals-per-game to 2.90), had a higher goal-per-game differential (+0.59 to +0.03), were better 5-on-5 (1.20 to 1.09), had a better power play (25.5 percent to 23.6), had a better record when scoring first, when trailing first, when leading after one period, when outshooting opponents, when being outshot by opponents. They have the better top-end players (Pavel Datsyuk, Henrik Zetterberg, Nicklas Lidstrom). They have the best home record of any team left in the West, no small consideration, given they have home ice advantage.

Why Detroit can’t win…

They can’t kill penalties. They had the worst penalty killing record of any team in the playoffs (78.3 percent). Even against as offensively challenged a team as the Columbus Blue Jackets in the first round, they killed only 10 of 13 shorthanded situations (76.9 percent – 13th of 16 playoff teams in the first round and worst of any surviving team). You have to think this goes hand-in-glove with the question mark they have in goal. Even though Chris Osgood had a fine first round (4-0, 1.75, .936), there is that 3.09 GAA and .887 save percentage he’s carrying out of the regular season to have in the back of one’s mind.

The Peerless’ Player to Ponder

Johan Franzen

Franzen was the Wings’ leading scorer in the Columbus series (2-4-6, +4 in the four-game sweep). “The Mule” is going to find the going somewhat harder in this series, given Anaheim’s penchant for physical play. He had three goals in three games against Anaheim this season and four in the last four games he’s played against the Ducks.


Why Anaheim can’t lose…

Since enduring a three game losing streak to open the month of March, Anaheim is 15-5-1, including a 4-2 series win over President’s Trophy winner San Jose. This is a battle-tested group for whom the players who need to perform did just that in the first round against the Sharks. Of the top eight scorers in the opening round series, six were members of the Cup-winning team in 2007, another (Ryan Whitney) played on a Cup finalist, and there is the precocious youngster Bobby Ryan, who had four goals in the opening round series.

Why Anaheim can’t win…

Their penalty killing was almost as bad in the regular season as was Detroit’s (79.7 percent, 23rd in the league and 15th among 16 playoff teams). While they picked it up in the first round (83.3 percent), they still ranked in the lower half of the 16 teams in the first round and have the second worst (to Detroit) mark of eight teams heading into the second round.

The Peerless’ Player to Ponder

Jonas Hiller

Here is a goalie who one might say has exploded onto the scene, but that would be less a reflection of Hiller’s performance dating back to the regular season than perhaps a case of “East Coast bias.” He doesn’t get the attention he might if he played in markets that aren’t in bed by the time he steps onto the ice. You can’t say he accumulated his numbers (1.64, .957, two shutouts) against a patsy in the first round, San Jose’s long history of premature playoff exits notwithstanding. One might be inclined to say that Detroit poses a different sort of challenge – they have the puck all the time. But San Jose actually led all playoff teams in the first round in total shots-per-game (38.3). Detroit was second (35.0). It means Hiller has to be just as sharp in this round as in Round 1 for the Ducks to advance.

In the end…

No lack of experience here. We have the last two Cup winners going at it, so it shouldn’t necessarily be a mistake fest. But therein lies the key, perhaps. The mistakes on the part of each team might be so infrequent that their occurrence takes on even greater importance. And if those mistakes are made, which team has the wherewithal to make amends before a goal is scored or has the resiliency to rebound from having given up a cheap tally? The teams might be just about even in that respect, too, so this series might come down to a simple war of style. While Detroit does have some players who can fight and scrap for position, they are going to be viewed as the “prettier” team. While Anaheim has a reputation as a roughhousing bunch, they have considerable talent. This time of year, we go with the team with the ability to get that extra inch both are clawing to get, a point that might be especially important, give that one of Detroit's scrappers -- Kris Draper -- will miss game one and two.

Anaheim in 7

Monday, April 20, 2009

Nuggets...

Two of the last six Stanley Cup champions faced an 0-2 deficit in a playoff series before going on to win the Cup.

Both times the deficit came in the first round.

In 2002, Detroit lost games 1 and 2 to Vancouver by scores of 4-3 (in OT) and 5-2, before storming back to win in six games.

In 2006, Carolina fell behind in games 1 and 2 to Montreal by scores of 6-1 and 6-5 (in OT), before roaring back to win in, yes, six games.

Saturday, January 31, 2009

A TWO-point afternoon: Caps 4 -- Red Wings 2


And that’s how they do that.

It was red, it was loud, and even for a chilly weekend afternoon in January, it had the whiff of a game played on a warm night in June. The Caps scored late and held off the Red Wings in March of the Penguins Penalized over the last 98 seconds to beat Detroit, 4-2. But Peerless, what did all mean?...

Figuring out a way to win. It’s one thing to come from a couple of goals down to beat a bottom dweller. It is another thing to take a game away from a team you’re tied with at the second intermission when that team is the defending Stanley Cup champion skating on your ice with the third highest number of road standings points in the league. Figuring out a way to win close, highly charged games against quality opponents is perhaps the last lesson a team has to learn to be a credible championship contender. And what fits hand in glove with that is…

Dealing with adversity I. Folks are going to remember Alex Ovechkin’s two goals to win, but what they might put aside (we’re betting the coaches don’t) is the fact that the Caps yet again gave up a power play goal – that’s ten games in a row and counting – and gave up seven power play opportunities (they’ve given up at least five in seven of their last eight games). You might argue that the last one is a technicality (Tom Poti took the penalty, but the Caps were already two men down from previous penalties), but the flip side of that is that the Caps took three penalties in the last 98 seconds of the game. That’s not playing with matches, it’s playing with a blowtorch. They fought through it in the end, which is a good thing (what isn’t a good thing is that these kinds of things are repeat offenses).

Dealing with adversity II. There isn’t a graceful way to say this – Alex Semin struggled (ok, that might be a bit “graceful”… you may call me a coward). We thought that if the Red Wings weren’t the opponent in this game, we would not have been surprised if Semin had been benched in the third period for his penultimate shift in the second period. From pulling up short with the puck at the Red Wing blue line when it looked as if he had a chance to press the matter – he seemed to pass up chances all afternoon – to his hooking penalty in the neutral zone (apparently, the experience in the Ottawa game had been forgotten). Detroit scored on the ensuing power play – a goal in the last minute of the period – but it didn’t cripple the Caps in terms of momentum the way it might have done with a younger, less experienced version of this team (say, two years ago, of even perhaps this time last year).

Dealing with adversity III. Detroit: 73 – Washington: 42. No, that’s not the halftime score of a Pistons/Wizards game, it is the shot attempts for the two teams today. That’s an indicator that the ice was tilted in Jose Theodore’s direction, but the Caps prevailed in spite of it. One had the feeling (well, I did at least) that the Caps would have these short bursts where they would threaten the Red Wings’ goal, but that Detroit won large blocks of time in terms of territorial play. They always seemed to have the puck. But hey, they count goals, not shot attempts.

It’s 60 minutes. That goes for players as well as teams. Alex Ovechkin took three shots in the first period. He would not so much as even attempt one for more than 35 minutes of playing time thereafter. Good thing there were still almost 13 minutes left to play when he did take his next shot. That one, and the next one he took, found the back of the net – the game winner and the insurance goal. That makes 18 third period goals (of his 33) for Ovechkin this year, a number that leads the league.

I’ve got rhythm. Well, I don’t, but Jose Theodore seems to have it. He’s gotten into a nice playing rhythm since “the yank.” He is 10-3-1, 2.03, .925 and has given up more than three goals only once in 13 games since that Ranger game when he was pulled after giving up three goals on five shots in less than 14 minutes. We’re a little surprised he didn’t get a star in this one, but it might be indicative of his being solid in goal to the point of being almost boring.

Defense, defense, defense. The Red Wings came from everywhere. 16 of 18 skaters had shots on goal; every skater except Tomas Kopecky (who did record a shot on goal) had at least two shot attempts. But, as the graphic below suggests, the Wings were pushed outside for many of those shots…



…and yes, it also shows that the Wings did miss having Tomas Holmstrom wreaking his own special havoc in front of the net. Another way to look at the job the Caps did… Pavel Datsyuk – one shot on goal. Marian Hossa – one shot on goal.

We’re thinking we need to see more from… Eric Fehr. He had five shots on goal, but he had a couple of great chances today that, frankly, he needs to bury. One shot – a slapper off a nice drop pass from Nicklas Backstrom – was the kind of shot a goal-scorer is going to nail. On another, off a great feed from Tomas Fleischmann, he just didn’t get very good wood (ok, composite) on the puck (we have a feeling the ice was not all that hot, and we cringe at the prospect of what it will be tomorrow for the Ottawa game). But it’s a good thing that Fehr is shooting the puck – five shots in less than ten minutes of ice time (we might suggest other wingers take a cue). Perhaps as in basketball, shooters need to shoot to get out of their slumps.

Nit picking. Yeah, that’s what it will be, but the Caps had what was an annoying result in faceoffs in one respect. They held Pavel Datsyuk and Valtteri Filppula even in the circle (18 up, 18 down), but went 2-for-9 against Justin Abdelkader, Tomas Kopeckey, Johan Franzen and Kris Draper.

Angels with Dirty Faces. Yup, it’s the name of a James Cagney movie. It also could describe the Caps in an important respect this afternoon. Mike Green had a nice goal on a wrister coming on a delayed penalty when Nicklas Backstrom was hooked down in front (perhaps distracting goalie Ty Conklin on the Green shot), but the other three goals were scored from in front, going to the net – Viktor Kozlov deflecting a Milan Jurcina drive… Ovechkin barreling past a defenseman, feeling the puck through his legs and charging in on the Detroit net to score… Ovechkin again after a Nicklas Backstrom shot from in close was turned away, Ovechkin chipping the puck over Conklin from the doorstep. Oh, and by the way…that play never happens if Backstrom doesn’t win the face off to start the action. The point is that three goals came from in tight – the money area that the Caps are going to have to dominate come the spring.

At the end of the day, it was a very entertaining game… “thrilling,” in fact. Why would we use that adjective? Well, it wasn’t the up and down kind of stuff that gets fans roaring and coming out of their seats. Quite the opposite – there were stretches in the game in which we were stunned by just how quiet the arena was, mostly a product of wonder over whether the Caps could hold off the Red Wings on one of their keep-the-puck-in-your-end-for-the-whole-shift kind of displays. Then when the Caps cleared the puck or started a rush of their own, there was a palpable sense of relief followed by the kind of cheering that speaks…”score one, already, and get these guys off our backs.” The Caps did just that and grabbed (“stole” would imply a certain amount of luck, and we think this one was more a product of hard work) two points in a game that serves as a measuring stick for how far the Caps have come this year.

Great job, boys.


The Peerless Prognosticator is ON THE AIR!!! -- Caps vs. Red Wings, January 31st

The Peerless Prognosticator is IN THE AIR!!!

Well, it’s been a few days.. days to get some practice in, to correct some problems, to use the tools of drills to engage in a little fix-up…


“arghh-arghh-arghh…”

Well, if it isn’t the tool man, himself…Tim “The Tool Man” Taylor. I guess it shouldn’t be too much of a surprise to find you here, being a Detroit guy and all.

“It’s Tim ‘The Puck Man’ Taylor, now…”

Is that so…

“Oh-h-h-h yeah… when I’m out there with my Binford 6100 graphite composite hybrid monofilament sure-grip...argh-argh-arghhh…”

So you’re a big scorer in the Detroit amateur leagues, eh?

“No, I’m still married to Jill…”

Good one…so, you’re still a Red Wings fan, I assume?

“We’re there at every game…”

We?

“Oh yeah. Me, the boys, Wilson, and even Heidi once in a while…

Once in a while?

“Yeah… every time she goes, the Jumbotron seems to get stuck on her and I have to go fix it.”

Ohhh..nooooo.


Well, the Red Wings are visiting Verizon Center in a matinee start, the first of back-to-back afternoon games on Fun Street this weekend. But the Red Wings, while still occupying the lofty standings status one might expect of a defending Stanley Cup champion and perennial contender, are doing it in a manner a little different than hockey fans might be accustomed to seeing. Here are the numbers…



What jumps out from the page here are the goals-against and penalty-killing numbers for the Red Wings. The 2.90 goals-against is a far cry from the 2.18 that the Red Wings posted last year (best in the league). And the 78.4 percent penalty kill is more than a little bit off the 84.0 percent number (8th overall) that the Wings posted last year.

The first thing that comes to mind in looking at those numbers is to wonder if shots matter here. Well, not much it would seem. The Wings are giving up 28.1 shots a game at the moment (tied for 4th in the league), not a large drop-off from their 23.5 given up last year (1st overall). And on the penalty kill, the Wings are actually giving up fewer power plays per game (4.25) than they did last year (4.35).

The next place to look is goaltending, and here the Red Wings appear to have a problem on their hands. Chris Osgood, who came into the season firmly entrenched as the number one netminder, has a goals-against average that is more than one full goal per game worse than last year (3.29 versus 2.09). His save percentage is down significantly as well (.880 from .914). What that means is that he has had only 26 appearances in the Wings’ 48 games and has left an opportunity for backup Ty Conklin to record major minutes.

Conklin has appeared in 24 games, recording more wins (16 versus 14 for Osgood) with a much better GAA (2.31) and save percentage (.917). It’s not as if Conklin is new to this rescue-in-relief role. He more or less saved the Penguins’ season last year when he took over for an injured Marc-Andre Fleury (17-4-5 during Fleury’s absence). The result is that the Red Wings seem to be postponing a day of reckoning. Despite Conklin’s playing relatively well -- better than Osgood in fact -- he has more or less split time with Osgood in the month of January. Conklin has six appearances this month, Osgood has seven in 12 Detroit games in January (Osgood was pulled in favor of Conklin after giving up three goals on 12 shots in the first period of the last game, a 4-2 loss to Dallas).

It’s a good thing, then, that the Red Wings are scoring at an amazing clip. They are first in the league in goals-per-game, but more than that, Detroit has 14 players in double digits in points, a dozen of them with more than 20 points. The Wings have seven players with more than ten goals, five of them with more than 15. A dozen players have at least one power play goal, seven of them with at least five.

And here is an odd number, but one that is entirely within the concept of Detroit’s philosophy of playing keep-away with the puck. Of the four skaters who have taken at least 350 faceoffs, none have lost a majority of their draws.

And another odd number, one that points to the depth of this team. No forward averages as much as 20 minutes of ice time per game. Coach Mike Babcock spreads it around.

Individually, the names at the top of the scoring list are familiar to even the most casual hockey fan – Pavel Datsyuk, Marian Hossa, Henrik Zetterberg. They’ve accounted for 60 of the 172 goals scored by the Wings, and collectively the average better than a point a game.

But there are a lot of teams with a top-trio of skaters – Ottawa has one, and they’re fighting to stay out of the lottery. The “undercard” on this team is what makes it impressive. Johan Franzen has 21 goals in 42 games, carrying over the big late season production he had last year. How big? In his last 74 games dating back to last season (including last year’s playoffs) he has 49 goals and has scored at least one goal in 38 of those games. He also leads the Red Wings in game-winning goals with six.

Jiri Hudler, whose size seemed to be a concern early in his career, is having a breakout season. His 17-22-39 scoring line has already yielded a career high in total goals and power play goals, and is only three points shy of his career high with 34 games left to play. However, Hudler is nursing a foot injury and might not play.

Daniel Cleary isn’t high on the list of goal scorers on this team, but three of his eight tallies have been game-winners (third on the team).

And then there is Tomas Holmstrom, who in a perverse sort of way might be the single irreplaceable cog in the Red Wing machine. While not necessarily the biggest player out there (6’, 203 pounds) he has developed a reputation for his backside being almost unremovable from the cage of a goalie’s mask. When he sets a screen in front, he might as well have a sign saying “WIDE LOAD” planted on the back of his shorts. It’s put him in a position to score 14 goals (sixth on the team), eight of them on the power play (tied for the top spot for Detroit). Trouble is, he (along with Zetterberg) is listed as "day-to-day" and is noted as out (as is Zetterberg) for this one. Caps goaltenders, rejoice!

On the blue line, the Wings are not only good, they’ve enjoyed continuity. Nicklas Lidstrom, Brian Rafalski, Kiklas Kronwwall, Brett Lebda, Andreas Lilja, and Brad Stuart all have played in at least 41 games, and five of them (Lebda being the exception) have played in at least 45 games. Five of them (Stuart being the exception here) have scored in double digits in points. Only Kronwall has a minus figure for the year, and the group has accounted for nine power play goals. Of the group, Stuart will not dress today, out of the lineup with an injury.

The Peerless’ Players to Ponder

Detroit: Marian Hossa

Hossa’s numbers are impressive – a rather symmetrical 24-24-48 this year in 48 games. But he has feasted on the Caps over the years. While he is averaged 0.92 points-per-game against the rest of the league over his career, he’s averaged 1.14 points-per-game (23-27-50) in 44 career games against Washington. He is 7-7-14 in his last dozen games this season, including five power play goals. He must be drooling at the prospect of setting up against the Caps’ penalty killers. The game could turn on whether the Caps can keep him off the board on the power play.

Washington: Sergei Fedorov

Fedorov is heading to the Hockey Hall of Fame on the body of work he authored as a Red Wing. Playing against them has been another matter. In 20 career games, he is 6-6-12, -20. He might be getting first line time in this one, based on what went on at practice yesterday. That would mean he’d get his chances adding to his point total, certainly. But scoring isn’t the problem, even if the Caps have scored more than three goals only three times in 11 games this month. Defending the other guys’ power play has been the more persistent problem, and Fedorov’s experience in that regard, noted well by Japers, might be the less visible, but more important, factor here.

These are two teams of a similar specie at different stages of development. The Red Wings have the Cups, score a lot, play keep-away with the puck, the travelling red road show, the guys giving them hometown discounts on contracts. The Caps aspire to Cups, score a lot, have shown flashes of being able to play keep-away, rock the red really well in their own house and have their own road crew, and will have some interesting contract matters down the road. This is a “measurement” game – how do the Caps measure up to a genuinely elite team, even if that elite team is banged up and coming in 0-3-1 in their last four games?

We think they’re measure quite well after a couple of days of fun and drills.

Caps 4 – Red Wings 3

Friday, January 30, 2009

A Tale of Two Januarys











Last year, on January 10th, Alex Ovechkin signed a contract with Washington that would pay him $124 million over 13 years. How did he respond to the added pressure? He went 7-4-11, +5 in his next half dozen games, and the Caps went 4-2-0.

Henrik Zetterberg signed a 12-year, $73 million contract on Wednesday that will keep him in Detroit for a while. How did he respond to the added pressure? He sat out a 4-2 loss to Dallas as a precautionary measure after his back tightened up in the Red Wings' previous game, a 3-2 overtime loss to Columbus.

OK, that's unfair. Truth is, we wouldn't mind if Zetterberg took all the time he needed to get back to 100 percent...even if it means missing tomorrow's game.

Friday, July 25, 2008

The "Outstanding Six" -- Can the Caps Join the Party?

As we understand the workings of “The Plan” as it applies to the Washington Capitals, it includes three pieces – the same three pieces any other team might use, albeit in ways not employed by all teams (cough…”Lightning”) – draft, trades, and free agents.

The draft is the core of the exercise. You draft well, you draft deep, you draft the players around whom you want to build your team. They are “The Core.” For the Capitals, that would include Alex Ovechkin, Mike Green, Nicklas Backstrom, and Alexander Semin, for starters (you may quibble on the margins for additional players).

Trades and free agents are similar in that you’re acquiring components from other “brands.” Trades are generally cheaper than comparably skilled free agents (salary-wise), who can be obtained to fill any number of roles (scorer, checking forward, defensive defenseman) and can be high-end skill players or tightly defined role players. They are the “mortar” to be used around the “bricks” of the core that was drafted.

In focusing on the draft as the core of the enterprise, the object is not just to be competitive, but to sustain a competitive level of play. Some teams (cough…”Lightning”) appear to want to write checks to buy competitiveness in the short term, but in looking at the longer term prospects for such a team, they are iffy. They will have salary issues, and the league has a history of teams failing to achieve the expected level of success through the “acquisition” route (particularly with respect to free agents).

We took a look at each of the six divisions since the 1990-1991 season and selected one team from each that enjoyed some lean times before achieving success. There are some patterns to be found in them.

Atlantic Division – New Jersey Devils

"They're putting a Mickey-Mouse operation on the ice. It's ruining hockey."

-- Wayne Gretzky, after the Oilers clubbed the Devils 13-4, November 19, 1983.

And so they were – a “Mickey Mouse operation,” that is. Although they would reach the playoffs in five of the next ten seasons, they would not so much as reach 90 points in doing it. Their high water mark was 87 points reached in both the 1991-1992 and 1992-1993 seasons. In those two seasons, though, there was something brewing. They had a couple of mid-20-something forwards in Claude Lemieux and Stephane Richer, a 20-year old rookie (in the second of those seasons) in Bill Guerin, a mid-20’s defenseman of some skill by the name of “Stevens” (in his first two years in New Jersey), another defenseman in the early stages of his career by the name of “Niedermayer,” and a goalie who played only four games in that 1991-1992 season, but who would play a lot more later – Martin Brodeur.

In 1993-1994, the Devils took a big leap. They went 47-25-12, their 106 points being a 19-point improvement on the previous year – and went all the way to the Eastern Conference finals before losing to the eventual Stanley Cup champion New York Rangers. The Devils won it all the following year, with a club that had added a young Bobby Holik (obtained from Hartford), a young Brian Rolston, and veterans Neal Broten (from Minnesota) and Bob Carpenter (from Washington).

Since then, the Devils have averaged 102 points per season and have finished with less than 95 only once. They have been able to sustain their success through the personnel skills of GM Lou Lamoriello, who has plugged holes and changed parts adroitly. If there has been a “core” (as we defined it) for the Devils over the past dozen seasons since they first won a Stanley Cup, it might include Patrik Elias (drafted in 1994), Brodeur (drafted in 1990), Scott Niedermayer (drafted in 1991, left after the 2003-2004 season), and Sergei Brylin (drafted in 1992). Added to that later, there might be included such players as John Madden (undrafted free agent who has been with the club since 1998), Jay Pandolfo (drafted in 1993, still with the club), Brian Rafalski (another undrafted free agent who was with the Devils from 1999-2000 through 2007-2007), and Scott Gomez (drafted in 1998 and left after the 2006-2007 season).

The Devils managed to pick up in trade or via free agency a number of players to fill roles for shorter periods of time – an Alexander Mogilny or a Joe Nieuwendyk, a Viktor Kozlov or a Richard Matvichuk, for example, to play a year or two at a time.

The Devils might not announce a “build from within” philosophy, but they have employed one of sorts, with an eye toward filling the missing pieces via trade or free agency. Of course, it helps to have that Lamoriello guy in the front office, too.

Northeast Division – Ottawa Senators

Once upon a time, this team was bad. No…really, really bad. Ten wins and 24 points bad…in an 84-game season in 1992-1993 (the Caps had an 8-67-5 season…21 points in 80 games in 1973-1974). As late as 1996-1997, they were only a 77-point team, although they did make the playoffs in that year.

The following year – 1997-1998 – one could now see the good team they would become, even if they had only 83 points in that year. They made the playoffs (losing to Washington in the second round), and did it with a youthful core – Daniel Alfredsson (drafted in 1994, still with the club), Wade Redden (drafted by the Islanders in 1995, but never playing a game in that organization), Chris Phillips (drafted in 1996), Magnus Arvedson (drafted in 1997).

After the Senators dipped their toes into the water in the 1996-1997 and 1997-1998 seasons, they would reel off nine seasons over which they averaged 103 points a year and never achieved fewer than 94 points in any of them. They did it largely with that core (Arvedson left the Senators after the 2002-2003 season), but managed to add a Marian Hossa (drafted in 1997), a Martin Havlat (drafted in 1999, left after the 2005-2006 season), a Jason Spezza (drafted in 2001), a Chris Neil (drafted in 1998), a Mike Fisher (drafted in 1998), and an Anton Volchenkov (drafted in 2000).

To that, the Senators added their own pieces of the puzzle from other organizations…a Vaclav Varada, a Zdeno Chara, a Todd White, or a Dany Heatley.

Ottawa has been more dependent (or successful, if you prefer) than most clubs, even the Devils, with respect to the draft. But it has allowed them to build and keep a core group of players. They haven’t had to dip into trades or free agency a lot, but they have engaged in the practice with some success. However, it hasn’t allowed them to get that franchise goalie that they always seem to lack (ok, they had Dominik Hasek for a year).

Southeast Division – Tampa Bay Lightning

The history of teams in this division since Y2K won’t make the histories of NHL legendary teams. Tampa Bay is probably the best of the lot over the past half-dozen years, and their tale is instructive.

In their first ten seasons, the Lightning peeked above the 75-point level only once (88 points in 1995-1996, when they made their only playoff appearance in their first decade). But between 2001-2002 and 2002-2003, when they leaped from 69 to 93 points, the light went on. That 2001-2002 team had its own core of precocious home-grown under-25 kids – Brad Richards (drafted in 1998), Pavel Kubina (drafted in 1996), and Vincent Lecavalier (drafted in 1998). They’d already added players such as Fredrik Modin (from Toronto), Vaclav Prospal (from Florida), Dave Andreychuk (from Buffalo), and goaltender Nikolai Khabibulin (from Phoenix after he spent an entire year in the IHL in a contract dispute), and would add defenseman Dan Boyle (from Florida) midway through that 2001-2002 season. Martin St. Louis had already come over from Calgary in 2000-2001.

By the following season, they could make use of veterans added to their young core and make the leap to 93 points. A year after that they dipped into the veteran pool once more, adding Cory Stillman (from St. Louis) and Darryl Sydor (from Columbus). The pieces were sufficiently positioned to earn the Lightning a Stanley Cup.

The Lightning were not able to sustain their success as had New Jersey or Ottawa, in part because of contract deals that paid Lecavalier, Richards, and St. Louis handsomely, but left the club with little else to fill out a competitive roster. The house came crashing down last year when the Lightning sank to 71 points and 30th place in the league. But for four years, at least, the Lightning averaged 96 points and were a formidable squad, largely a product of the home-grown Lecavalier and Richards, and the pieces they added later (most notably Boyle, Prospal, and Khabibulin).

Central Division – Detroit Red Wings

These days, the defending Stanley Cup champion is looked at as the platinum standard for talent and management in the NHL. Such has not always been the case. In 1990-1991, the Wings were a 76-point team that ended a 17-year period in which they exceeded 80 points just once.

However, that 1990-1991 team had two home-grown players who would be essential to the Red Wings’ ascent to the highest tier of teams through the rest of the 1990’s and beyond – Steve Yzerman (drafted in 1983, but still only 25 years old that season) and Sergei Fedorov (drafted in 1989). They were the leading scorers on that team, with 108 and 79 points, respectively.

The following year, the Wings added two more players essential to their core – Nicklas Lidstrom and Vladimir Konstantinov on the blue line – both of whom were drafted in 1989 (that 1989 draft ranks as one of the great ones in terms of nailing the amateur evaluations for the Wings – five players played at least 630 NHL games, and Konstantinov certainly would have played far in excess of that had his career not been cut short after an auto accident). The Wings also added Vyacheslav Kozlov (drafted in 1990) for a cup of coffee with the club that year, and he would be a large player in future Wings’ success down the road.

For the Wings, the core was in place so that when it came to 1996-1997 (the year they would win their first Stanley Cup in 42 years), they could add a Brendan Shanhan (from Hartford early that season), Tomas Sandstrom (from Pittsburgh later that year), and Larry Murphy (from Toronto late in the year). It made for a formidable group and cemented the Wings as a perennial contender.

They would add pieces to their core in years to follow – a Tomas Holmstron (drafted in 1994), a Pavel Datsyuk (drafted in 1998), a Henrik Zetterberg (drafted in 1999). But they also would add players intelligently from other organizations to supplement that core – a Chris Chelios (from Chicago in 1998-1999), a Brett Hull (from Dallas in 2001-2002), Luc Robitaille (from Los Angeles, also in 2001-2002), a Robert Lang (from Washington in 2003-2004). It has made Detroit the embodiment of the phrase, “we don’t rebuild, we reload.”

Northwest Division – Colorado Avalanche

Maybe it’s the snow. It snows in Quebec; it snows in Denver. But while the Quebec Nordiques suffered some truly miserable seasons – in their last nine seasons in Canada, the Nordiques cleared 80 points just once -- they were rejuvenated in Denver, even though the seeds of success had already been planted.

That last team in Quebec in the 1994-1995 season included Joe Sakic up front (drafted in 1987) and Adam Foote on the blue line (drafted in 1989). There was Peter Forsberg (drafted by Philadelphia, but having never played a game in that organization, he being part of the consolation prize to Quebec when Eric Lindros was traded after declaring he would never play for the club that drafted him – Quebec). There was Adam Deadmarsh (drafted in 1993).

The following year, the now “Colorado Avalanche” were in a position to compete as the young guys had another year of experience. It didn’t hurt that there was a goaltender in Montreal with a festering relationship with his coach, one that would explode when he was left in to watch nine pucks fly by him before being pulled in a 12-1 loss in December 1995. Patrick Roy, who declared while leaving the bench in that game that he had played his last game in Montreal, became an Avalanche three days later.

But Roy, while the pivotal addition to the Avalanche from outside, wasn’t the only one to contribute. Mike Keane, who went with Roy to the Avalanche, was an important role player. Sandis Ozolinsh was added (from San Jose).

More players that would represent a core group were coming through the Colorado pipeline – Milan Hejduk (drafted in 1994), Chris Drury (also drafted in 1994), Alex Tanguay (drafted in 1998). But the Avalanche would add pieces to this puzzle as well that would culminate in a championship in 2001 – Rob Blake and Steve Reinprecht (from Los Angeles), and Ray Bourque (obtained in 1999-2000 from Boston).

Colorado has continued the theme, adding players fro within such as John-Michael Liles (drafted in 2000), Wojtek Wolski (drafted in 2004), and Paul Stastny (drafted in 2005). They’ve also added players from the outside to complement them, such as Ian Laperriere (from Los Angeles), Andrew Brunette (from Minnesota), and Ryan Smyth (from the Islanders).

The Avalanche has built and rebuilt a core, around which they have added veterans (for the most part) to keep themselves competitive.

Pacific Division – Dallas Stars

In their previous incarnation as the Minnesota North Stars, this franchise limped along on a path of mediocrity over their last decade in Minnesota, never better than 88 points, never worse than 51. The term “also ran” fit pretty well. But the last team in Minnesota had a glimmer of hope attached it in a couple of youngsters just cutting their teeth – 20-year old Derian Hatcher (drafted in 1990) and 22-year old Mike Modano (drafted in 1988). Modano would celebrate the move to Dallas the following year with a 50-goal season (still his career high) in leading the Stars (just “Stars”) to a 97-point season.

Trouble is, they hadn’t really “arrived” yet. They struggled for the next two seasons (with 42 points in the abbreviated 1994-1995 season, and 66 points the year after). But they were adding important pieces from within – Jamie Langenbrunner (drafted in 1993) and Jere Lehtinen (drafted in 1992), of greatest importance.

The Stars then also started to add other pieces, too, like Darryl Sydor (from Los Angeles) and Joe Nieuwendyk (from Calgary).

Adding a new coach – Ken Hitchcock – allowed the parts to work well as a whole, as the Stars improved by 38 points from 1995-1996 (66 points) to 1996-1997 (104 points). It started an 11-year (and counting) streak in which the Stars have averaged 104 points a season and have been below 97 points only once.

Dallas has not been quite as dependent on a “core,” perhaps, as the other teams mentioned here, but they have added assets from within over the years – Marty Turco (drafted in 1994), Brenden Morrow (drafted in 1997), Steve Ott (drafted in 2000), Jussi Jokinen (drafted in 2001), and Antti Miettinen (drafted in 2000).

Dallas has been successful in adding players – Philippe Boucher (from Los Angeles in 2002), Jason Arnott (from New Jersey in 2001, through 2006), Bill Guerin (from Boston in 2002, though 2006), and Stu Barnes (from Buffalo in 2002), for example.

All of these teams are perennial contenders. In the 60 seasons of hockey comprising the last ten seasons for each team, they have a combined 52 playoff teams (of the eight non-playoff teams, Tampa Bay has six of them). Five of the teams have won a total of eight Stanley Cups. The other – Ottawa – has appeared in a final.

There is the “Original Six,” and there is the “Outstanding Six” described here. It is the level of sustained competitiveness to which the Capitals aspire and are building a club for the long run. What one sees here is the outline of a pattern. A core of players is drafted, developed, and brought to the parent club. It is only after that when serious additions from outside are made, and generally to complement – not to replace – the roles that the core players occupy.

It is interesting to note as well that the big leap these clubs took in points that started them on the road to sustained competitiveness was often accompanied by a coaching change – Jacques Lemaire in New Jersey (when the Devils improved from 87 to 106 points from the 1992-1993 to the 1993-1994 season), John Tortorella (when Tampa Bay made a 34-point jump after two seasons under him), Bryan Murray (a 28 point leap in his first two years in Detroit), Ken Hitchcock (38 points in his first year in Dallas), Marc Crawford (a 28-point jump over his first two seasons with the Nordiques/Avalanche). There might be a “chicken and the egg” issue here – perhaps the ingredients were in place for the coach, perhaps the coach was needed to get the maximum from the ingredients – but there seems is a pattern in how these clubs got to where they are.

This has implications for the Capitals, who look to be a team wanting to operate in the same fashion. A core was built – Ovechkin, Green, Backstrom, and Semin. It is a group that struggled – not so much with their own play, but under the burdens of a team that did not enjoy much success in recent years. To this group, parts were added – Viktor Kozlov, Tom Poti, Michael Nylander. Other parts of what might constitute a growing core were added as well – Jeff Schultz, Tomas Fleischmann. Others might yet be on the way -- an Eric Fehr or a Karl Alzner. A coaching change was made, perhaps not heralded as salvation at the time, but ultimately a very successful one. As that success built upon itself, more pieces were added – Sergei Fedorov, Matt Cooke, Cristobal Huet – to fill distinct roles.

More success followed, and although the Caps could not manage to improve upon a first-round playoff appearance, they have the look of the Lightning of 2003 (without, one hopes, the contract problems), the Stars of 1997, or – be still our beating hearts – the Red Wings of 1992. All were teams on the rise with Stanley Cups in their futures; in the case of the Lightning and the Stars, the very near future – each won the Cup within two years after their first big leap in standings points.

This could, as they say, be the start of something big.

Friday, July 18, 2008

Take that Detroit!..Miller signs with Buffalo


That sound you might have heard early this afternoon was the collective groan of fans of Red Wings Nation, which might have been expecting a native son to return home.

But Ryan Miller has re-signed with the Buffalo Sabres...five years, $6.25 million per.

Unless Jimmy Howard is really something, the Wings might be having goaltender issues in the not too distant future.

As for the Sabres, they finally get to hold on to a potential free agent. It doesn't make up for the losses of Daniel Briere, or Chris Drury, or Brian Campbell...or maybe even Dainius Zubrus. But it's something for Sabres fans to breathe easier about.