
Won't be long now...
It's once and always Stanley Cup Champion Washington Capitals hockey, all day, all night, all the time . . . or when I get around to it



This guy's no jackass - it's Mario Lemule! The goofy grinnin' donkey gets really funky when he hits the ice. This guy slips and slides, jumps and jives to the hottest, horse hoovin' hip-hop hits. Mario spends a lot of time in his private stallion stable in a prominent part of the Pittsburgh suburbs. Look out pooper-scoopers...don't step in Mario's manure!
Characteristics: Enormous ears that flap freely. Naughty "snotty" nostrils on the end of his snout. A goofy growl on his grill that makes everyone giggle. Huge hooves for reeking havoc.

“In his 'Hanlon' segment, Poti played in only 15 of 21 games, missing six with a groin injury. He finished that part of the schedule 0-4-4, -4…In his last 56 games (he would miss another five games to injury over two separate incidents), he was 2-23-25, +13.”23 assists in his last 56 games…that was on a pace to be his third best year in terms of assists, and he wasn’t getting the power play time that Mike Green was getting – more than two minutes fewer per game (2:39 for Poti to 4:41 for Green).

“…getting those tickets might be a little tougher than they have been the past three seasons. But considering how many tickets were available on StubHub and other ticket broker sites for the March 9 game, Capitals season ticket holders will probably be more than willing to help you again in 2008-09.”



It makes one wonder at what passes for the “big three” among NHL teams. During this agonizingly slow stretch of the hockey calendar, we were doodling with lineups and such, and wondered what the 30 teams might look like in terms of their “big threes.” Before we get too deep into this, this isn’t entirely science. One might split hairs over who plays what position among the forwards, or if one player or another is really “big three” caliber (and to extent they’re not, it might be an indicator of a club that is, or will struggle). However, we took a look at the clubs with only a few criteria in mind. The “big three” is comprised of a center, a winger, and a defenseman (goaltenders weren’t included, because they tend have longer lead times to establish themselves, and a goaltender would make “four”). To be a “big three,” the player had to be under 30 years of age, and the players had to be contributors (raw recruits of considerable promise generally aren’t in this group). See? I told you it wasn’t science. But if you’re looking for a theme to this, it is “built to last,” and part of that is how long the trio, under their current contracts (or extensions, if already signed), will be together.
So, with that, here they are, one fan’s look at the 30 “big three’s:”
And what do we glean from this? Well, for those of you paying attention, the Capitals’ big three is the most expensive of the lot, but you already suspected as much, didn’t you? That’s a product of two big-time extensions that will kick in this year.* The other leg of that triad – Nicklas Backstrom – represents some work to do down the road insofar as it is his contract that keeps the three together only through the 2009-2010 season.
We find it interesting that 17 teams will have to reassemble or re-sign their groups after this coming season, since at least one member of the big three has an expiring contract. Only two clubs have groups whose contracts permit them to be together (barring trade or other departure) for more than three years. Curiously, those two are Edmonton, which is generally thought to have a pretty good prospect pool behind such players as Shawn Horcoff, Dustin Penner, and Tom Gilbert; and Tampa Bay, which has almost no one coming in behind the likes of Vincent Lecavalier, Ryan Malone, and Matthew Carle (well, there is that Stamkos kid…). Opposite poles, as it were.
We’re looking at a snapshot here, and salaries are a moving target. So, divining a relationship between dollars and playoffs is a bit of work. Let’s look at Washington, for example…Alex Ovechkin, Mike Green, and Nicklas Backstrom will represent a $17.2 million cap hit for the 2008-2009 season. The Caps made the playoffs last year when these three represented a $7.1 million cap hit.
Let’s cut to the happy ending…does it matter? We think it does. Continuity and talent are two important ingredients for success in a league where the salary cap and the possibility of large paydays through free agency make for a lot of player movement. However, looking at the group ranked in terms of cap burden suggests that there is a third element here as well. If you look at the list above, nine of the teams in the top half (in terms of cap burden this year) made the playoffs last year. Seven clubs in the lower half made it. Even accounting for the fact that some of these “big threes” include players not on the roster last year, there are eight teams in the top half of the cap rankings having made no changes to that top three that made the playoffs last year, five in the lower half. Money helps, to a point (and in some case, moving up in the rankings reflect rewards for and retention of core elements – Washington is a case in point), but one has to build a team around these guys, too.
Here’s the thing, though. The Capitals have the youngest of the young here. Ovechkin, Backstrom, and Green – is the youngest of the 30 big threes. Seeing as how Ovechkin and Green will be together (barring trade or other departure) through the 2011-2012 season, and how Backstrom is on record as saying “I don’t want to play anywhere else in the NHL. Washington is my team,” this could be a group that will be together for quite a stretch. It just another way of showing that this is a club that is being “built to last.”
* The careful reader will note that the Caps’ being at the top of this list comes on something of a technicality – Pittsburgh’s Evgeni Malkin is conspicuously missing from the Penguins’ big three, his being a center. If he was to be included, replacing Ruslan Fedotenko, Pittsburgh’s big three costs $21,400,000. They also stay together through the 2012-2013 season. And, Ottawa has the unsettled matter of defenseman Andrei Meszaros, which could push the Senators past the Capitals in replacing Anton Volchenkov as part of their “big three.”

The blockbuster box office for the Capitals this summer speaks to two things: The bandwagon nature of the D.C. fan (indisputable) and the reaction from the hockey community to the current incarnation of the team. The guy who works at The Pentagon and cheered for Rod Gilbert as a young Rangers fan is buying the same season ticket as the kid who grew up in Arlington, Va. cheering for Peter Bondra -- they both love the game, and luckily have the means to watch Alexander Ovechkin 41 times a season.
Capitals fans are a proud group (to which my colleague Mr. McKeon can now attest). But what makes Washington an indispensible NHL city goes beyond the fortunes of the local team on or off the ice. For years, the naysayers have been saying D.C. will never be a Capitals town.
They miss the point: It is now, and always shall be, a hockey town.
Well, no, it's not. With all due respect to my fellow wizards, this strikes me as an over-romanticized view of what is happening here. Washington has not been, is not now, and chances are never will be a "hockey town" as the term is known with respect to, say, Toronto or Montreal or Detroit (which, despite a serious economic downturn that has largely been avoided by Washington, outdrew the Caps by almost 3,500 per game last season*).
Let's not let a couple of dozen games and a playoff round dull the memory. This is a club that couldn't draw much more than flies in December, struggled mightily with attendance the past few years, and has never been a consistent draw in the three-plus decades of its existence. It is a club that has not enjoyed a lot of success on the ice, either, with one Stanley Cup final to show for its history. It has only played in two conference finals.
This is not to say that Washington is bereft of hockey fans -- of Caps or of other teams. In fact, we think Wyshynski is dead-on when he states that "Capitals fans are a proud group." That goes for the Fan in Charge, too, who rarely lets a slight to his club go unchallenged. The sight of so many visiting jerseys at Caps games attests to hockey fans from other places who call DC home. And there is certainly a significant blogging footprint in Caps Land, which is as good an indicator as any that there are folks who care, and care deeply about the club.
Washington is a town like a lot of towns in North America when it comes to sports. Fans show up when clubs win; they don't when they lose. That the baseball Nationals, in the inaugural year of their gleaming new facility, could draw barely 70 percent of capacity this season is as good an example as any of the "bandwagon" nature of the fans locally. Only the NFL's Redskins seem immune to this.
From my chair, a "hockey town" is not one that is "personality dependent" (see: Pittsburgh, which doesn't impress me as a hockey town, either). A "hockey town" doesn't watch attendance tank when the team is doing poorly, at least not to the degree it happened here the last few years, despite arguably the game's brightest young star playing here. A "hockey town" is one where the team is covered above the fold on the front page of the sports section when it isn't the last stretch run or the first round of the playoffs. A "hockey town" isn't a sometime thing, a term only to be invoked when things are going well.
I think the Caps are, and are being built for the long haul, to be competitive season-in and season-out. I think that will keep them from having to endure the lowest-of-lows that was the 2003-2004 season and the years right after the lockout. I think it will ultimately make them a top-half or top-third club in attendance, somewhere around maybe 17-17,500 in average attendance. They will probably enjoy more and better local media coverage, but never approaching that of the Redskins (even in the best times) and probably never as consistently good as what coverage the Wizards get in basketball or the Nationals in baseball.
But before one thinks that we're being too negative or contrarian, the Capitals have done wonders for hockey in the community, inspiring a lot of youngsters to take up the sport who would not have in their absence. And that has grown a whole new generation of hockey fans, a lasting contribution to the sport in this area.
There isn't anything wrong with a city that has a hockey team not being a "hockey town." Frankly, we think the whole thought of calling Washington such is part of the intoxication of last year's storybook finish. Washington is a city in which a hockey team -- and hockey -- can thrive. For that, fans and aspiring young hockey players have the Capitals to thank. It is a franchise that has struggled from time to time, and it is entirely possible it will do so again. That doesn't diminsh one iota the passion of the fans -- old and new -- who follow the club, or run it for that matter. Heaven knows, we would put ourselves in that group of passionate fans. It just doesn't convince us that Washington is a "hockey town."
* We realize this is not an entirely fair comparison, as Detroit (which had its own struggles in the 1980's) has enjoyed considerable success for some time now and has much more hockey tradition to draw on, but that serves to support the point, too -- Detroit is a "hockey town," Washington is not.

"...we play in the Nation’s Capital, the sixth biggest media market in the US. We are the fastest growing team in the league. We have the reigning NHL MVP on our team. We are a team that is built to last. We have a great and growing fan base. We will be a perennial playoff team for a long, long time. We intend to win a Stanley Cup. We are part of the fabric of our community. We love our fans and they love us back. We have built a franchise that is worth a quarter of a billion dollars with blood, sweat, tears and a major cash investment...."
One of the tricks I employ when I look at a calendar and wish a future date might arrive faster is to look back the same number of days, weeks, or months and think about what I was doing then.