A bit late for a recap, but let's stroll down the memory lane a bit. 2010 was the year of THE Olympic hockey tournament. Held in Canada, birthplace of hockey. Thus, the following world championships were doomed beforehand by most of the media analysts and sports experts.
The games were pretty much set up for Russia's third straight gold medal. They had the dream team they wanted and other countries had to scrape the teams out of secondary players due to lots of rejections by superstars.
As a Finn, I even had some hopes up for the second gold medal. With solid team play and some timely goals, Finland could have had a good chance this year. Well, those dreams came crashing down early in the tournament. Losing to Denmark and struggling with Germany moved the medal games' interest towards other teams.
Canada and USA were seriously sloppy on their run, USA even taking a shot of falling down to B level. European big countries, Czech, Russia and Sweden played mediocre hockey with occasional flashes of enthusiasm.
Eventually the final was set up with Russia and Czech republic. Counting the millions in salary, Russians were up by a decade. In the end Czech took the gold after very solid defensive game and enough individual skill to finish the counter attack scoring chances. Russia fell apart with uncontrolled superstars. The coaching of that team seemed to be nonexistent.
A shame indeed. If one looks at Russian players individually, they are about as good as they come. There's speed, amazing skill and now even toughness. Goaltending was outstanding throughout the tournament too. So what went wrong? Why didn't they wipe Czech out with 10-1 or something in the final?
Well, take a look at one of the flashiest players ever, Alexander Ovechkin. He had five goals or something, which was decent production. However, if you take a look at the shots on goal, five isn't that much. If anyone would have counted the number of shots taken to defenders' shin pads, five would have been ridiculously low count for the amount of attempts. In Washington, AO would find himself in the bench after shooting 10 times in the first defender and causing a counter attack every time. And he doesn't do that there. Same goes with the super talented guys trying to dribble the puck all the way through five defending players and a goalie. Not passing, not shooting. Just losing the puck 99% of the time. Wake up, coach?
Return to the very basics of team sports and hockey, Russia would have easily dominated in Germany. I wonder would their hockey organization ever be willing to take a North-American coach? My guess, not, but that might prove some magic on ice. Just imagine having some speedy Russians for a checking line? Some being told to shoot more, some to aim the shots?
Well, anyway, I'm a fan of entertaining hockey and for that purpose I sure hope that Russia and other teams pick up their planning boards and get prepared for the next international tournament.
Best moments in the tournament, in random order: Jaromir Jagr, the old horse still can keep two defenders off the puck and shoot or pass, just plain magical. Young Swedes, Pääjärvi and Omark will rock the NHL in a couple of years. Just let the guys play. Petteri Nummelin, the heart and soul of Finnish national team, year after year.
The rock bottom: Semin tipping Ovechkin headfirst into Fedorov on the attacking zone, leading to Czech's gold medal winning goal by Rolinek. Epic fail - about 1:45 onwards.
2010/06/04
2010/05/03
NHL Playoff cliches and reality
Finally, the regular season is over and the real tests are ahead in the NHL playoffs. Like always, the last few rounds of regular season have been really intensive and full of desperation for the teams on the playoff bubble. It actually took all 82 and a deciding overtime to separate finally send Flyers in and leave Rangers out. Very movie-like script, but it really doesn't get much better.
Before the playoffs it was again time for the journalists to reach to their bags of cliches. Washington Capitals were a perfect ground to create (read reuse) more columns and stories on. The classic pieces of wisdom included the "good production in regular season does not guarantee success in playoffs" and "defence and goaltending will be crucial" as well as "veteran leadership and experience may tilt the scale for underdogs". Same old, same old.
Well, Capitals' goaltending was average, not bad but not excellent either. They were in the middle of the pack on that, but lead the scoring by increduible 0.6 goals per game more than the second best team, Vancouver Canucks. Defence was solid and super productive in the attack zone, lead by Mike Green's heroics. A man, who must be seriously annoying person to be left out of Olympics and be benched in the end of regular season while being by far the best offensive d-man in the league for the second year in a row. Oh yeah, but the playoffs are a different story, right.
The series against Montreal Canadiens was scheduled to be 4-0 with Washington walking over their opponents easily. Then the Capitals went the distance to prove the analysts' cliche-filled prognosis right. How annoying, the most exiting team out on the first round. Not meeting the Penguins in the conference finals. Alex Ovechkin not raising the cup in the end. Nothing, just an early summer vacation.
Judging from the yearly upsets and surprises and drawing from the "old wisdom", it seams that a hockey team is somewhat human in nature. It has a mental state that is vulnerable under high stress and expectations. It's hard to imagine that one team would consist of only the players who choke in the tough spot, but somehow the losing mentality gets contagious and the whole team just falls apart. With this state some statistically improbable numbers start to appear, like 3 goals in 140 shots, not many goals from guys who scored almost a hundred in regular season. Team spirit indeed.
Well, maybe there's some experience behind the worn out cliches for playoff hockey. It sure will be interesting to see how Montreal now does against another young and blazing team in Pittsburgh and who will eventually take the cup. It's been very evenly matched so far, which is always good for the fans. Hard to pick one team over others at this point.
And let's see a bright side on the collapse of Capitals. We'll be seeing some Ovechkin-Semin magic in the international level on the upcoming World championships. Surprisingly high caliber players on the tournament for an Olympic year.
Before the playoffs it was again time for the journalists to reach to their bags of cliches. Washington Capitals were a perfect ground to create (read reuse) more columns and stories on. The classic pieces of wisdom included the "good production in regular season does not guarantee success in playoffs" and "defence and goaltending will be crucial" as well as "veteran leadership and experience may tilt the scale for underdogs". Same old, same old.
Well, Capitals' goaltending was average, not bad but not excellent either. They were in the middle of the pack on that, but lead the scoring by increduible 0.6 goals per game more than the second best team, Vancouver Canucks. Defence was solid and super productive in the attack zone, lead by Mike Green's heroics. A man, who must be seriously annoying person to be left out of Olympics and be benched in the end of regular season while being by far the best offensive d-man in the league for the second year in a row. Oh yeah, but the playoffs are a different story, right.
The series against Montreal Canadiens was scheduled to be 4-0 with Washington walking over their opponents easily. Then the Capitals went the distance to prove the analysts' cliche-filled prognosis right. How annoying, the most exiting team out on the first round. Not meeting the Penguins in the conference finals. Alex Ovechkin not raising the cup in the end. Nothing, just an early summer vacation.
Judging from the yearly upsets and surprises and drawing from the "old wisdom", it seams that a hockey team is somewhat human in nature. It has a mental state that is vulnerable under high stress and expectations. It's hard to imagine that one team would consist of only the players who choke in the tough spot, but somehow the losing mentality gets contagious and the whole team just falls apart. With this state some statistically improbable numbers start to appear, like 3 goals in 140 shots, not many goals from guys who scored almost a hundred in regular season. Team spirit indeed.
Well, maybe there's some experience behind the worn out cliches for playoff hockey. It sure will be interesting to see how Montreal now does against another young and blazing team in Pittsburgh and who will eventually take the cup. It's been very evenly matched so far, which is always good for the fans. Hard to pick one team over others at this point.
And let's see a bright side on the collapse of Capitals. We'll be seeing some Ovechkin-Semin magic in the international level on the upcoming World championships. Surprisingly high caliber players on the tournament for an Olympic year.
2010/03/15
The 2010 olympic hockey - quick recap
Who still remembers the olympic tournament in February, now that all national leagues are back in business? Let's go back memory lane and revisit some key moments.
The expectations first. Games in Canada, the motherland of hockey. Massive pressure to keep the gold in Vancouver. Last two world championships went for Russia. Last olympics' gold to Sweden after total North American nosedive. It was time to get back in track. Biggest bets of course for Canada and Russia, dark horses USA and maybe Sweden looming in the background.
The first round was difficult for most. The big names scratched and clawed against lesser hockey nations like Swizerland and Norway. There even was an odd loss here and there for the big names. NHL veteran -heavy Slovakia beating Russia or fresh and hungry USA beating Canada can't really be seen as major upsets. It just tells more about the nature of one game dynamics and the difficulty of putting the team together from even the best pieces. However, the number one favorite Canada played so lazy that they ended up in the extra playoff round. The actual round was easy but the win in that game booked a quarter final matchup against the "planned" final opponent, Russia.
The highest expectations for this game and the flattest of outcomes ever. Russians weren't able to get their game together at all and Canada's straightforward style and more professional approach turned this into a onesided show. And not much of that either, since the game was over already in the first. Russia out.
Slovakia then took out Sweden and their hopes of defending the gold. Swedes were momentarily dazzling but somehow seemed to run out of time. Finland managed the top performance of the whole games on the quarters against Czech Republic. An evenly matched game with skills versus grind. Solid defence and great goaltending got Finns to the medal rounds. USA cruised to victory its "easy game" against Swizerland and were lucky to not get upset by the lazy attitude. No one had the brightest understanding on the power balance going into the semis.
Canada saved some energy in disposing the worn out Slovaks while USA knocked out Finland in the first round (period) and concentrated on skating practices for the next two. Easily the top two going for gold and the semifinal losers trying to motivate themselves for bronze.
Eventually Finland had the legs for the whole three periods in the bronze game and ended the tournament on a high note. Winning the last game, having the medals and finishing on third in the tournament of all the best. Not bad.
Luckily for the Oplympic hockey, the final was what it was. Just an amazing hockey game. With very evenly matched teams of first line and defence pair stars from Canada and young, powerful, fast and ambitious role players from USA. As a hockey fan it was just pure entertainment. The ability to play just perfectly every situation by Canadians and the fear nothing, trust yourself style of the US players. Just fantastic. At one point I believed Canada had it all together. No penalties, surgical scoring, always on the balance. By the end of the game, Americans just pounded their fast attacks to the Canadian end and got the equalizing goals. Overtime was just the cherry on top. Well, not literally for me, since my game recording cut off about 5 minutes in the overtime. However, I dug the championship goal from the internet and that wasn't much of a detail in this great game. The best game I've seen in a long while.
I sure hope NHL decision makers stop fumbling and declare that Alex Ovechkin can take all the other stars with him in the games in Sochi instead of going awol. Can there be better promotional event for the whole game and thus its biggest market, NHL, than the biggest event of 2014? How can there be a debate at all? We'll, let's not get into details on who knows about life outside their backyard and who not. Go, international hockey, go!
A tip for national team GMs: There might be a somewhat easy gold to be taken in this year's world championships after the opympics hangover..
The expectations first. Games in Canada, the motherland of hockey. Massive pressure to keep the gold in Vancouver. Last two world championships went for Russia. Last olympics' gold to Sweden after total North American nosedive. It was time to get back in track. Biggest bets of course for Canada and Russia, dark horses USA and maybe Sweden looming in the background.
The first round was difficult for most. The big names scratched and clawed against lesser hockey nations like Swizerland and Norway. There even was an odd loss here and there for the big names. NHL veteran -heavy Slovakia beating Russia or fresh and hungry USA beating Canada can't really be seen as major upsets. It just tells more about the nature of one game dynamics and the difficulty of putting the team together from even the best pieces. However, the number one favorite Canada played so lazy that they ended up in the extra playoff round. The actual round was easy but the win in that game booked a quarter final matchup against the "planned" final opponent, Russia.
The highest expectations for this game and the flattest of outcomes ever. Russians weren't able to get their game together at all and Canada's straightforward style and more professional approach turned this into a onesided show. And not much of that either, since the game was over already in the first. Russia out.
Slovakia then took out Sweden and their hopes of defending the gold. Swedes were momentarily dazzling but somehow seemed to run out of time. Finland managed the top performance of the whole games on the quarters against Czech Republic. An evenly matched game with skills versus grind. Solid defence and great goaltending got Finns to the medal rounds. USA cruised to victory its "easy game" against Swizerland and were lucky to not get upset by the lazy attitude. No one had the brightest understanding on the power balance going into the semis.
Canada saved some energy in disposing the worn out Slovaks while USA knocked out Finland in the first round (period) and concentrated on skating practices for the next two. Easily the top two going for gold and the semifinal losers trying to motivate themselves for bronze.
Eventually Finland had the legs for the whole three periods in the bronze game and ended the tournament on a high note. Winning the last game, having the medals and finishing on third in the tournament of all the best. Not bad.
Luckily for the Oplympic hockey, the final was what it was. Just an amazing hockey game. With very evenly matched teams of first line and defence pair stars from Canada and young, powerful, fast and ambitious role players from USA. As a hockey fan it was just pure entertainment. The ability to play just perfectly every situation by Canadians and the fear nothing, trust yourself style of the US players. Just fantastic. At one point I believed Canada had it all together. No penalties, surgical scoring, always on the balance. By the end of the game, Americans just pounded their fast attacks to the Canadian end and got the equalizing goals. Overtime was just the cherry on top. Well, not literally for me, since my game recording cut off about 5 minutes in the overtime. However, I dug the championship goal from the internet and that wasn't much of a detail in this great game. The best game I've seen in a long while.
I sure hope NHL decision makers stop fumbling and declare that Alex Ovechkin can take all the other stars with him in the games in Sochi instead of going awol. Can there be better promotional event for the whole game and thus its biggest market, NHL, than the biggest event of 2014? How can there be a debate at all? We'll, let's not get into details on who knows about life outside their backyard and who not. Go, international hockey, go!
A tip for national team GMs: There might be a somewhat easy gold to be taken in this year's world championships after the opympics hangover..
2010/03/12
The eternal Crosby vs. Ovechkin discussion
Okay, here's another topic that has been chewed down to the bone. I just can't help taking part. I'll try to tell you what the others think, maybe even share my personal opinion. So, which one of these ultimate superstars is best?
First. If you talk to Canadians, well, you're on somewhat biased territory. Crosby has been stamped the best player since Gretzky and Lemieux since he's been a little kid. And by no means in vain. He's just terrific and if you think of the pressure, his career so far is even more amazing. The NHL is not the same as it was with the previous greats, so it's practically impossible for anyone to challenge e.g. Gretzky's records. Players and teams in general are just so much better and more evenly matched.
Also, if you talk with the traditionalists in hockey circles, the answer is pretty much always Crosby. The most praised hockey analysts are from the US and Canada. Their wisdom is quoted over and over by "lesser hockey nations". They speak English. An English speaking kid is by default easier to get a grip on. So let's go with Sid. Ovie has taken English language over with similar stunning fashion as he's taken the NHL. However, he's still the foreign kid.
Also, the older generation just cannot get over the cold war approach to eastern players, especially Russians. It sometimes is just hilarious when these guys go on and on in trying to generalize a Russian player with "bad habits" like low work ethics, diving, not being physical, obstructing with the stick, being individuals instead of team players etc. These analysts should be moved out of the throne and let younger knowledge take over the modern media.
I don't understand Russian, but it doesn't take much of a magician to guess that on that side of the "iron curtain" analysts opinions are somewhat opposite. In my native Finland, with somewhat intimate history with the Russians, most of the media follows blindly on the path of the North America. Exceptions exist and make the whole hockey coverage somewhat tolerable.
But let's put the politics aside and concentrate on these two guys. Crosby, as said before, was breed to become the face of the NHL. Ovechkin took most of the hockey world by surprise. Of course he hit the radar of all scouts, but his emergence from yet another Russian kid coming over to NHL to becoming the most thrilling force on the ice is as amazing as it comes. Easier path than Crosby's, especially on mental level. Who knows how the Russian athlete machinery came up with this masterpiece.
But how to compare these guys? Statistics, well, both have been leading the scoring for the last years. Consistency, both are very much present at every game. They may miss a beat here and there, but not for more than a game or two. Meaning to the team, both have taken the bottom feeder teams and practically carried the whole franchises from near bankrupcy and bottom of the standings to biggest cup contenders and the franchises with biggest fan following. Team sport, right?
So, what about the other angle? Which team would dive deeper if they lost the star? My guess, Washington. The fallback stars are Malkin in Pittsburgh and Semin&Bäckström in Washington. Malkin has proven that he can carry the team on tough spots, Semin has proven that he cannot. Bäckström is a mystery, but doesn't look like a leader, at least yet. Fantastic players, all of these anyway. Not a massive difference here either.
Let's dig into the details. Shot, Ovie, no question about it. Passing, Sid. Physicality, Ovie, duh. Shootouts, Sid, by far. Reckless penalties, Ovie. Losing the peer respect by talking, Sid. Jokes, Ovie. Classic boyschool interviews, Sid. Individual efforts, Ovie. Positioning, Sid.
On purely physical skills, Ovie takes the edge. On mental side it's Sid. Show value is just great for both.
So is there some kind of a conclusion? Not really. Every team would take either one of them and sacrifice half of the roster in doing so. The owners want to lock these guys for life. If a team needs a "lead-by-example" person, go with Sid. If you need someone to look up and in awe to raise the team spirits, go with Ovie.
My personal take. Well, for fantasy league, Ovie has an edge on producing it all, points, penalties. For Finnish national team, Crosby could show the next generation of players what it takes to make it to the absolute top. For a beer downtown, definitely Ovechkin. For a hardcore hockey follower, Sid. For an occasional fan, Ovie and his highlights.
In the end, what would be even more interesting than choosing the better one? What would these two do together on the line. Best center and best winger. Throw in some speedy bruiser with a goalmouth scoring touch and you'd get the line of a century. I'll keep my fingers crossed for all-stars game, as lame as it is..
First. If you talk to Canadians, well, you're on somewhat biased territory. Crosby has been stamped the best player since Gretzky and Lemieux since he's been a little kid. And by no means in vain. He's just terrific and if you think of the pressure, his career so far is even more amazing. The NHL is not the same as it was with the previous greats, so it's practically impossible for anyone to challenge e.g. Gretzky's records. Players and teams in general are just so much better and more evenly matched.
Also, if you talk with the traditionalists in hockey circles, the answer is pretty much always Crosby. The most praised hockey analysts are from the US and Canada. Their wisdom is quoted over and over by "lesser hockey nations". They speak English. An English speaking kid is by default easier to get a grip on. So let's go with Sid. Ovie has taken English language over with similar stunning fashion as he's taken the NHL. However, he's still the foreign kid.
Also, the older generation just cannot get over the cold war approach to eastern players, especially Russians. It sometimes is just hilarious when these guys go on and on in trying to generalize a Russian player with "bad habits" like low work ethics, diving, not being physical, obstructing with the stick, being individuals instead of team players etc. These analysts should be moved out of the throne and let younger knowledge take over the modern media.
I don't understand Russian, but it doesn't take much of a magician to guess that on that side of the "iron curtain" analysts opinions are somewhat opposite. In my native Finland, with somewhat intimate history with the Russians, most of the media follows blindly on the path of the North America. Exceptions exist and make the whole hockey coverage somewhat tolerable.
But let's put the politics aside and concentrate on these two guys. Crosby, as said before, was breed to become the face of the NHL. Ovechkin took most of the hockey world by surprise. Of course he hit the radar of all scouts, but his emergence from yet another Russian kid coming over to NHL to becoming the most thrilling force on the ice is as amazing as it comes. Easier path than Crosby's, especially on mental level. Who knows how the Russian athlete machinery came up with this masterpiece.
But how to compare these guys? Statistics, well, both have been leading the scoring for the last years. Consistency, both are very much present at every game. They may miss a beat here and there, but not for more than a game or two. Meaning to the team, both have taken the bottom feeder teams and practically carried the whole franchises from near bankrupcy and bottom of the standings to biggest cup contenders and the franchises with biggest fan following. Team sport, right?
So, what about the other angle? Which team would dive deeper if they lost the star? My guess, Washington. The fallback stars are Malkin in Pittsburgh and Semin&Bäckström in Washington. Malkin has proven that he can carry the team on tough spots, Semin has proven that he cannot. Bäckström is a mystery, but doesn't look like a leader, at least yet. Fantastic players, all of these anyway. Not a massive difference here either.
Let's dig into the details. Shot, Ovie, no question about it. Passing, Sid. Physicality, Ovie, duh. Shootouts, Sid, by far. Reckless penalties, Ovie. Losing the peer respect by talking, Sid. Jokes, Ovie. Classic boyschool interviews, Sid. Individual efforts, Ovie. Positioning, Sid.
On purely physical skills, Ovie takes the edge. On mental side it's Sid. Show value is just great for both.
So is there some kind of a conclusion? Not really. Every team would take either one of them and sacrifice half of the roster in doing so. The owners want to lock these guys for life. If a team needs a "lead-by-example" person, go with Sid. If you need someone to look up and in awe to raise the team spirits, go with Ovie.
My personal take. Well, for fantasy league, Ovie has an edge on producing it all, points, penalties. For Finnish national team, Crosby could show the next generation of players what it takes to make it to the absolute top. For a beer downtown, definitely Ovechkin. For a hardcore hockey follower, Sid. For an occasional fan, Ovie and his highlights.
In the end, what would be even more interesting than choosing the better one? What would these two do together on the line. Best center and best winger. Throw in some speedy bruiser with a goalmouth scoring touch and you'd get the line of a century. I'll keep my fingers crossed for all-stars game, as lame as it is..
2010/03/11
Happiness is a headshot
The title is ripped off from my old friends old army paratrooper t-shirt. Rather provocative in its original spot, but also pretty fitting in today's NHL. The topic of course being one of this season's hottest, headshots. Cases Cooke vs. Savard, Richards vs. Booth being among the worst (and cleanest, with surgical precision) in hockey history.
Whether you call it a dirty, blindside or just plain irresponsible, the defence always bases its arguments on the legality of those within current NHL rulebook. NHL teams' general managers are discussing over the topic, comissinary has his say, some committees gather to ponder about it and whatnot. It must be a more complicated question than "is it okay to cause intentional, potentially permanent, injury to other players within the written rules?".
It definitely is tough to draw the line. Let's put clear headshots aside for a while. There are check from behind, tripping near the boards, knee-on-knee collisions, irresponsible stick cuts and even the occasional freak skate blade in the air tumbling-overs. All of these end seasons and careers. Some are fully intentional, part of the game's physicality. Some are unfortunate accidents. What then constitutes for the suspension or fine. Who else than the player under jurisdiction can say for sure whether it was vicious or just unfortunate? Not the easiest job for the leagua disciplinarian, Mr. Campbell.
From my point of view it all boils down to the spirit of this sport as an entertainment. Spectators want blood, sweat and tears. Owners want spectators. Coaches want to keep their jobs and require the players to finish their checks without hesitation. Players are indeed 100 kilo bodies flying across the ice for 30kmph. Collisions happen, accidents happen. And the guys are paid millions to suck it up and just suffer through the pain. Old school hockey experts practically all defend the violent hits as part of the "tough guys' tough game". Critics see brutality, inhumanity in action. Again, opinions vary a lot. It is just a matter of time when we see the first paralyzed or dead player laying on the highest level of pro hockey. Is it the chance we have to take and price we have to pay to keep the game alive?
I'd definitely like to hear the analysis on this matter by the ultimate witnesses. The guys that have been on the both ends of the matter, giving and receiving. How about Darcy Tucker and his YouTube hit on Sami Kapanen? He was out this season after miserably failed hit by Tuomo Ruutu. What about the long-term star concussees, Paul Kariya, Eric Lindros etc. Are these guys tough enough to step in the rink fearlessly after some very disturbing incidents? Will the payday cover the fear? And the heavy, reckless hitters then. Scott Stevens, Dion Phaneuf? What they have to say? Do they feel sorry about the "victims"? Or is it in the end just part of the game? You tell me..
Whether you call it a dirty, blindside or just plain irresponsible, the defence always bases its arguments on the legality of those within current NHL rulebook. NHL teams' general managers are discussing over the topic, comissinary has his say, some committees gather to ponder about it and whatnot. It must be a more complicated question than "is it okay to cause intentional, potentially permanent, injury to other players within the written rules?".
It definitely is tough to draw the line. Let's put clear headshots aside for a while. There are check from behind, tripping near the boards, knee-on-knee collisions, irresponsible stick cuts and even the occasional freak skate blade in the air tumbling-overs. All of these end seasons and careers. Some are fully intentional, part of the game's physicality. Some are unfortunate accidents. What then constitutes for the suspension or fine. Who else than the player under jurisdiction can say for sure whether it was vicious or just unfortunate? Not the easiest job for the leagua disciplinarian, Mr. Campbell.
From my point of view it all boils down to the spirit of this sport as an entertainment. Spectators want blood, sweat and tears. Owners want spectators. Coaches want to keep their jobs and require the players to finish their checks without hesitation. Players are indeed 100 kilo bodies flying across the ice for 30kmph. Collisions happen, accidents happen. And the guys are paid millions to suck it up and just suffer through the pain. Old school hockey experts practically all defend the violent hits as part of the "tough guys' tough game". Critics see brutality, inhumanity in action. Again, opinions vary a lot. It is just a matter of time when we see the first paralyzed or dead player laying on the highest level of pro hockey. Is it the chance we have to take and price we have to pay to keep the game alive?
I'd definitely like to hear the analysis on this matter by the ultimate witnesses. The guys that have been on the both ends of the matter, giving and receiving. How about Darcy Tucker and his YouTube hit on Sami Kapanen? He was out this season after miserably failed hit by Tuomo Ruutu. What about the long-term star concussees, Paul Kariya, Eric Lindros etc. Are these guys tough enough to step in the rink fearlessly after some very disturbing incidents? Will the payday cover the fear? And the heavy, reckless hitters then. Scott Stevens, Dion Phaneuf? What they have to say? Do they feel sorry about the "victims"? Or is it in the end just part of the game? You tell me..
2010/03/04
NHL Trade deadline 2010
All of the hockey enthusiasts were holding their breath in anticipation. Where would the major moves take place? Would my favourite team lose or gain a star? Which team would give up and cash out their biggest names for draft pics and prospects? Which would take the risk and get some overpriced "veteran leadership" to make it to the playoffs?
At the end of the day, one big disappointed sigh. Hardly any remarkable trades were made. And all the biggest by far, already before the Olympics break. The teams clearly in decided to play it safe and not shake the roster. The teams clearly out didn't have anything to sell. The teams on the playoff bubble were too scared to mix it up or couldn't find a partner to make major trades. Well, at least we'll have very tightly integrated teams fighting for playoff spots this time. That might even be better for the fans.
Some random picks from me here. Case Vesa Toskala. A somewhat fairytaleish rise from San Jose backup to the number one goalie in the biggst hockey town in the planet in Toronto followed by a sad story of being traded a couple of times under trade deadline and landing as the backup of Miikka Kiprusoff. One of the few guys that will keep on playing 75 games a season. A fellow Finn with merits to share. A guy from the same home town in Finland. Vesa will unfortunately (from a Finnish fan point of view) end up sitting off the back of his shorts in Calgary.
Defencemen Lubomir Visnovsky and Ryan Whitney changed teams EDM-ANA. I can't see any point in Anaheim making this move. Players have similar attributes, but Whitney is a young horse where Visnovsky already a veteran. I guess this is the old merits talking. Anyway, I'd say this is good for Edmonton's rebuilding plans.
Colorado dumped Vojtek Volski. Can't wrap my mind around that either. The guy has been great for a few seasons, supercool in shootouts, one of the leading scorers in the team, still young and improving and whatnot. That one slipped off pretty cheap. Peter Mueller quite likely has talent and a decent future in NHL ahead of him, but still..
Pre-olympics trades were interesting, Toronto getting Phaneuf and putting all on this one card. Rangers swapping underachievers with Calgary. And last but not the least, New Jersey trying to integrate a superstar, bigger-than-the-team sniper artist Ilya Kovalchuck to a very tight, system-first team with dicipline above all. Kovalchuck could do it all, skate, hit, score, defend if he finds the right motivation. With that sort of package, New Jersey could well be off for a long cup run this year.
In conclusion, the trades were nothing special this year. The big guns of Washington, Pittsburgh, San Jose, New Jersey and Chicago will prevail and wrestle for the cup in a "league of their own". Surprises may come by Vancouver and Philly. Others can't take the heat this season.
At the end of the day, one big disappointed sigh. Hardly any remarkable trades were made. And all the biggest by far, already before the Olympics break. The teams clearly in decided to play it safe and not shake the roster. The teams clearly out didn't have anything to sell. The teams on the playoff bubble were too scared to mix it up or couldn't find a partner to make major trades. Well, at least we'll have very tightly integrated teams fighting for playoff spots this time. That might even be better for the fans.
Some random picks from me here. Case Vesa Toskala. A somewhat fairytaleish rise from San Jose backup to the number one goalie in the biggst hockey town in the planet in Toronto followed by a sad story of being traded a couple of times under trade deadline and landing as the backup of Miikka Kiprusoff. One of the few guys that will keep on playing 75 games a season. A fellow Finn with merits to share. A guy from the same home town in Finland. Vesa will unfortunately (from a Finnish fan point of view) end up sitting off the back of his shorts in Calgary.
Defencemen Lubomir Visnovsky and Ryan Whitney changed teams EDM-ANA. I can't see any point in Anaheim making this move. Players have similar attributes, but Whitney is a young horse where Visnovsky already a veteran. I guess this is the old merits talking. Anyway, I'd say this is good for Edmonton's rebuilding plans.
Colorado dumped Vojtek Volski. Can't wrap my mind around that either. The guy has been great for a few seasons, supercool in shootouts, one of the leading scorers in the team, still young and improving and whatnot. That one slipped off pretty cheap. Peter Mueller quite likely has talent and a decent future in NHL ahead of him, but still..
Pre-olympics trades were interesting, Toronto getting Phaneuf and putting all on this one card. Rangers swapping underachievers with Calgary. And last but not the least, New Jersey trying to integrate a superstar, bigger-than-the-team sniper artist Ilya Kovalchuck to a very tight, system-first team with dicipline above all. Kovalchuck could do it all, skate, hit, score, defend if he finds the right motivation. With that sort of package, New Jersey could well be off for a long cup run this year.
In conclusion, the trades were nothing special this year. The big guns of Washington, Pittsburgh, San Jose, New Jersey and Chicago will prevail and wrestle for the cup in a "league of their own". Surprises may come by Vancouver and Philly. Others can't take the heat this season.
2010/03/01
The media coverage vs. fans' understanding
Okay, here we go again. One of the big reasons in starting this blog is the genereal annoyance that breeds from the media coverage of the sport of ice hockey (and quite likely of any other sport you're into). While there are loads of very competent hockey people in the planet, for every one of them there is at least ten "journalists" trying to reap rewards by ripping the essentials of these analysts' content. With terrible results, naturally.
The problem lies in the coverage of a sport by any "sports generalist" in the media. TV, newspapers etc. just pull one tool from the pool and ask them to do a coverage or a story of some topic in relatively short time frame. Then the poor person rips of some sources, glues the pieces together and irresponsibly posts it in a forum that is widely read and consumed with way too little criticism.
This differs dramatically from a person with practically no media background and hugely subjective understanding of the game posting his ramblings for anyone in the whole wide internet..
Anyway, after following mostly the Finnish national team and NHL for the last 20 years I've created a reasonably large database of player history and find myself again and again in disbelief after reading some quick stories or listening to live commentary. Players are nowadays categorized based on some unique event for way too long, sometimes even through their whole careers. And the average spectator, who hasn't had the time to validate the information from standard sources is lead to believe these categorizations. No wonder, some of the players dislike the interviews so much that you can't help but feel sorry for them for that thirty second torture in the hands of an ignorant reporter with his own "highlight" in the making.
Well, to end the mumblings about obvious issues, I'll just hope the reporters would grow up a bit, do their homework and give us fans the coverage that has some value. Instead of just taking the easy way in the reality-tv oriented way.
Reporter (reality): "What happened there? Weren't you ready to start the game?"
Player X (imaginary): "WTF? We all had skates on, laces tight, proper curved blades, all the gear on, high-carb lunch, nice little afternoon nap and all. It's not like we were starting our first game ever. So yes, we were ready, we just sucked quite a bit today."
The problem lies in the coverage of a sport by any "sports generalist" in the media. TV, newspapers etc. just pull one tool from the pool and ask them to do a coverage or a story of some topic in relatively short time frame. Then the poor person rips of some sources, glues the pieces together and irresponsibly posts it in a forum that is widely read and consumed with way too little criticism.
This differs dramatically from a person with practically no media background and hugely subjective understanding of the game posting his ramblings for anyone in the whole wide internet..
Anyway, after following mostly the Finnish national team and NHL for the last 20 years I've created a reasonably large database of player history and find myself again and again in disbelief after reading some quick stories or listening to live commentary. Players are nowadays categorized based on some unique event for way too long, sometimes even through their whole careers. And the average spectator, who hasn't had the time to validate the information from standard sources is lead to believe these categorizations. No wonder, some of the players dislike the interviews so much that you can't help but feel sorry for them for that thirty second torture in the hands of an ignorant reporter with his own "highlight" in the making.
Well, to end the mumblings about obvious issues, I'll just hope the reporters would grow up a bit, do their homework and give us fans the coverage that has some value. Instead of just taking the easy way in the reality-tv oriented way.
Reporter (reality): "What happened there? Weren't you ready to start the game?"
Player X (imaginary): "WTF? We all had skates on, laces tight, proper curved blades, all the gear on, high-carb lunch, nice little afternoon nap and all. It's not like we were starting our first game ever. So yes, we were ready, we just sucked quite a bit today."
The beginning
Where should I start? The final push to start this blog was the Vancouver Olympics hockey tournament. And in that, the emotional trigger, the surreal semifinal between my native country Finland and USA. Just got an idea that I could use a vent to get rid of all the hockey analysis going on in my mind that has nothing to do with the real priorities in my life. No point in steaming at home about the ups and the downs of some "silly" game. In the net I might even reach someone who enjoys this. A win-win even..
Anyway, just the intro to the blog this time. There will be more background for the whole excercise in the next post. After that I promise to come back as often as I have some emotional outburst on national, international or any other level of hockey. Players, teams, tournaments. Media approach, stories, highlights. Anything that deserves another opinion.
Anyway, just the intro to the blog this time. There will be more background for the whole excercise in the next post. After that I promise to come back as often as I have some emotional outburst on national, international or any other level of hockey. Players, teams, tournaments. Media approach, stories, highlights. Anything that deserves another opinion.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
