Playoffs Never-Leaver: Round 4

Round 1 post, Round 2 post, Round 3 post

They're still playing hockey? It sure seems like a long time since I made my round 1 post. Let's get this over with.

First, let's recap my picks for round 3:

Pick: Wings in 5

Pretty much as expected, although I was hoping for a bit more of an offensive show.


Pick: Penguins in 7

Well, my gut was right that Pittsburgh would win, but I certainly didn't expect a sweep. This was probably my biggest missed prediction so far, in that I didn't see the series being anywhere near that lopsided.


OK, so I'm a bit late for the finals, with Detroit already winning game 1, so I won't make a prediction, although going into the series I was leaning towards Pittsburgh, perhaps thinking of the 2 back-to-back Oiler-Islanders series of the mid 80's which marked the changing of the dynastic guard in the NHL with the Gretzky led Oilers taking over from the Islanders who beat the Oilers in '84 for the 4th straight title, only to be beaten easily by the same Oiler team one year later in '85. But after game 1, Detroit may be just too good. I guess we'll see.

Playoff Griever: Round 3

Round 1 post, Round 2 post

So round 2 gave us a seven game showdown between Ovechkin vs. Crosby and Malkin and Ovechkin almost single-handedly destroyed my pool team and eliminated the Pens but the Pens greater depth and more reliable goaltending was the difference in the end.

Meanwhile Carolina plays another 7 game series, this time eliminating the Bruins late in the first OT of game 7.

Over in the West, the last two cup champs battled it out in a series that could have been a great cup finals itself and was only decided in the last few minutes of game 7.

And finally the up and coming Hawks snipers helped their team come from behind to tie or take the lead in all 6 games, finishing up by scoring 7 on a Canucks team that hadn't allowed 7 goals once all season.

Not really a whole lot more a hockey fan could ask for.

my predictions were:
Pick: Carolina in 6
Pick: Pittsburgh in 6
Pick: Wings in 6
Pick: Canucks in 7

The one series I said would go 7, went 6, and the three I said would go 6, went 7. Let's just say I predicted they would all be close, and I was right about that. The winners were all as I predicted, with the exception, of course, of the Canucks.

The difference between my expectation and the result can be summarized in one stat: The Canucks .879 save percentage (or if you prefer, the Hawks 12.2% shooting percentage). The difference between a save percentage like that and one like, say .920, is over a third fewer goals scored against. Would the Canucks have won the series if the Hawks had scored over a third fewer goals? Of course. Part of the low percentage was Luongo being off his game, part was the Canucks failing to keep the Hawks to the perimeter and part was simply bad luck. I suspect that if you were to tabulate the series winning percentage of teams with save percentages below .880 over the last decade or two, it would be *extremely* low.

As for next round, it is rare to see two such strong offensive (and weak defensive) teams as Detroit and Chicago meet this late in the playoffs. I hope they go toe to toe and see who can outskate and outscore the other which would be great to watch. The Hawks will likely need Osgood's save pct. to be even lower than .879 to win this one.

Pick: Wings in 5

Pittsburgh-Carolina

The classic 4 seed vs. 6 seed matchup! I honestly don't know here. Carolina looked like they were getting tired as the series against Boston wore on, but the Pens have played a fair bit of hockey as well. The Pens made tough work of much easier opponents than the Canes have faced so far, but somehow my gut just wants to go with Pittsburgh on this one.

Pick: Pittsburgh in 7

Playoff Fever: Round 2

Round 1 Here

First, let's recap my predictions for round 1:

Predicted: Bruins in 4
Actual: Bruins in 4
Comment: Played out as expected, a mismatch. It won't be anywhere near this easy for the Bruins in round 2.

Prediction: Rangers in 7
Actual: Capitals in 7
Comment: Well it was decided on the last 5 minutes, so I was mostly right on this one. It's hard to believe the winner of this entertaining but poorly played series is going any further in the playoffs. I hope Lundqvist is off his game during the Olympics...

Prediction: Devils in 7
Actual: Hurricanes in 7
Comment: Wow, what a series - far and away the best of round 1 - it would have been even if game 7 had been a clunker, and it was anything but. The 2 minutes of sustained pressure the Canes put in before scoring the tying goal should be stored somewhere as the footage you pull out when you want to show pure determination in action. Brodeur was great, Ward was incredible - the number of great saves he made when the Canes were down by one in the third period - I just shake my head. Both teams played extremely well. A final note, if Whitney could master shooting it through the 5 hole off his own skate, that would be unstoppable.

Prediction: Penguins in 6
Actual: Penguins in 6
Comment:It's funny how lackadaisical the Pens look sometimes, but they're still effective.

Predicted: Sharks in 6
Actual: Ducks in 6
Comment: OK, this is the one series I got wrong that wasn't decided with less than 5 minutes left in game 7. Still, I knew the Ducks would be tough, and luckily I almost entirely avoided taking any Sharks on my playoff pool teams!

Predicted: Wings in 5
Actual: Wings in 4
Comment: I thought that Columbus might pull one out at home and they almost did, but this was no contest, the most lopsided first round series I've seen in a while.

Predicted: Canucks in 6
Actual: Canucks in 4
Comment: Could easily have gone 6, but I'm glad it didn't. Interesting to see how good the Blues are next year.

Predicted: Blackhawks in 5
Actual: Blackhawks in 6
Comment: Took 6 instead of 5, but played out pretty much as expected. As a Canucks fan, we can only hope Calgary keeps Keenan around for a few more years.



Round 2:

Bruins-Hurricanes - A team that gave hardly anything to win their first round series and a team that had to give their all. Maybe I'm overreacting to just watching the end of the Canes-Devils series, but I don't think the Bruins are going to be able to match the Canes.

Pick: Carolina in 6

Pittsburgh-Washington - Talk about star power in this matchup! The difference might be the stars, but I think its more likely that its going to be Pittsburgh's superior ability to defend that makes the crucial difference.

Pick: Pittsburgh in 6

Detroit-Anaheim: Two years ago the Ducks won the cup and the one series they almost lost (and arguably were lucky not to) was the one against the Wings which they won in 6 close games. Two years later, the Ducks aren't as good as they were then. Getzlaf is improved and Ryan is good, but Niedermayer and Selanne are two years older and MacDonald and Pahlsson are gone.

The Wings are probably better than they were then, and are just as good as they were when they won the cup last year, but the big question is, of course, goaltending. Should be a fascinating series.

Pick: Wings in 6

Vancouver-Chicago: Should be a pretty evenly matched series. Key for the Canucks will be whether they can keep the young Hawks to the perimeter. In round 1 Luongo was never beaten from more than about 10 feet out. The other key will be secondary scoring as, especially in Chicago, the Sedins are likely to face a pretty good shutdown unit. Having a healthy Sundin and a strong second line with Demitra and Kesler will be important.

Pick: Canucks in 7

Playoff Fever

So, NHL playoff time. There are some great matchups in the East, particularly Boston-Montreal and Philadelphia-Pittsburgh. But enough about teams not named the Canucks. The hockey part of my brain suggests that, moreso than any time in recent memory (or perhaps any memory), the Canucks have the necessary pieces (quality goaltending, a defence that can move the puck, two legitimate scoring lines, adequate special teams, reasonable measures of all three of quickness, skill and toughness, and finally, freedom from injury) to make a serious run at the cup.

The little kid inside is just excited to see some potentially meaningful playoff hockey.

The jaded cynic inside (that generally is in charge of writing blog posts) says that if 30 years of being a sports fan have proven anything it’s that excitement is (almost!) always an ill-advised prelude to disappointment. The Blues have played well for the last couple of months, they have a lot of up and coming young talent, the West is full of tough teams, the Canucks are inconsistent, they get trapped in their own end too easily, take too many dumb penalties, their record against the good teams in the conference isn't all that great, Sundin is too old and slow, there are question marks on the defence, etc. etc.

Still, that cynical voice was opposed to even writing this post in the first place, yet here it is, so bring on the playoffs!

---
For the record:
Bruins in 4
Rangers in 7
Devils in 7
Penguins in 6

Sharks in 6
Wings in 5
Canucks in 6
Blackhawks in 5

Foul Ball

Imagine the following scenario - it may sound a little far-fetched, but bear with me:

The NHL has resumed play, and with the new salary cap looking to make the Toronto Maple Leafs (even more) profitable no matter how bad the team does, the team's value has skyrocketed and the pension fund owners are looking to sell while the selling's good.

There are a couple of rival bidders for the team. One is being led by a former friend of Pierre Trudeau who helped put together the National Energy Program and who remains a key fundraiser for the Liberal party.

The other group includes Don Cherry, (flush from sales of Rock 'Em Sock 'Em 32 and the latest round of sub commercials), as a minor partner.

Now, imagine that the honourable Stephen Owen, Liberal minister for sport, comes out and says that, given Cherry's outspoken nature and conservative views on many issues, really it would be better for everyone if Cherry wasn't allowed to own an NHL team and that the NHL shouldn't look for any favours from the government if they let Cherry become an owner.

I'm guessing people might not take this too well.

So what's the point of me bringing up this absurdly unlikely hypothetical? Because if you live in the U.S. it's not absurdity - it's reality.

The excellent baseball blog, 'Yard Work', gives one of the Republican lawmakers in question a chance to explain himself, which he does with surprising candour.

I bring this up for three reasons. One, because it's just so nuts I had to say something and two, to help show why any signs of Canada becoming more like the U.S. make me nervous and three, to help show why I tend to be distrustful of right wing parties which claim to favour a small non-interfering government.

---
Note: thanks to Spearin for the links.

Making it Look Easy

Congratulations to Canada's Junior Hockey team, whose overwhelming dominance of this year's tournament makes them clearly the best junior hockey team ever assembled.

As an aside (and to make a dull entry a bit more interesting), I find it odd how people have debates over which sports teams are the best ever, in which they compare teams from different eras. In every measurable field of athletic endeavour, the athletes of today are far better than those of the past.

Similarly today's athletes in team sports are bigger, stronger, faster, in better shape and better trained than those of the past. I for one, am very confident that the 2004 Edmonton Oilers could easily defeat the 1986 Oilers.

As a further aside, the argument that the NHL is suffering from dilution of talent is equally nonsense. Just the infusion of foreign talent alone would have been enough to compensate from going from 21 teams (as in the high scoring 80's) to the current 30. Add in the constant improvements in the overall talent base and it seems pretty clear that the league has a greater depth of talented players than ever before. In fact, it's more likely that scoring is down because there's too much talent (especially in net and on defense), rather than the other way around.