The Marchand Of Venice

It's remarkable how insane the Vancouver Canucks - Boston Bruins rivalry has become lately following Saturday's Stanley Cup rematch. It's led to everything from fanbase and organizational fights to media going after bloggers who cover the other team to reporters verbally duking it out with opposing players to allegations of media defacing the NHL's media guides merely because a player they didn't like adorned them. There are some serious questions about the media's role in all this, and I talked about some of them this morning in an excellent discussion with Jessica Quiroli and others. Serious discussions aren't a lot of fun, though, so instead, I present one of the wackier ideas that came to mind; rewriting Shakespeare's "The Merchant of Venice" (original quotations available here) to cover the Vancouver-Boston rivalry, and particularly Boston's Brad Marchand's polarizing hit on Sami Salo and subsequent suspension. Thanks to Cam Charron, Thomas Drance, Tom Hawthorn, Jason Ford  and
Ashok Sadana for their help, and thanks to Maclean Kay and PPP for encouraging me to turn this into a post. What follows is a partial script. Call me, Hollywood!

THE MARCHAND OF VENICE

DRAMATIS PERSONAE:
- In the role of Shylock, Brad Marchand, A Bruin
- In the role of Portia, Brendan Shanahan, A Disciplinarian
- In the role of Antonio, Sami Salo, A Wounded Canuck
- In the role of Gratiano, Alain Vigneault, A Coach
- In the role of Bassanio, The Vancouver Media, A Dubious Entity
- In the role of Salarino, Zdeno Chara, A Boston Captain

ACT I:

"In sooth, I know not why I am always injured. It wearies me, you say it wearies you." - Salo

"I hold the NHL but as the NHL, Vigneault, a stage, where every man must play a part, and mine a sad one." - Salo

When criticized for his team fighting back against Boston, "Why should a man whose blood is warm within, sit like his grandsire cut in alabaster?" - Vigneault

"There are a sort of men, whose visages
Do cream and mantle like a standing pond;
And do a willful stillness entertain,
With purpose to be dress'd in an opinion
Of wisdom, gravity, profound conceit;
As who should say, I am Sir Oracle,
And when I ope my lips, let no dog bark!" - Vigneault on the Vancouver media

"Vigneault speaks an infinite deal of nothing, more than any man in all Vancouver." - The Vancouver media

"If to do were as easy as to know what were good to do, Brad Marchand and the rest wouldn't be in the league and Sidney Crosby would still be healthy." - Shanahan

"When he is best, he is a little worse than a man; and when he is worst, he is little better than a beast." - Shanahan on Marchand

"If I can catch him once upon the hip,
I will feed fat the ancient grudge I bear him." - Marchand on Salo.

"They hate our sacred nation; and they rail,
Even there where Canucks fans most do congregate,
On me, my hits, and my well-won roster spot,
Which they call a disgrace." - Marchand on the Vancouver media.

"Thee devil can cite scripture for his purpose.
An evil soul producing holy witness,
Is like a villain with a smiling cheek." - Salo on Marchand's justifications.

"O Father Shanahan! What these Canucks are,
Whose own hard dealings teaches them suspect
The thoughts of others!" - Marchand to Shanahan.

Read more...

Rick Rypien, depression, The Toronto Star and Mike Woods

Rick Rypien's death at 27 is a tragic story, and one that's resonated with a lot of people. Hundreds headed to Rogers Arena for an impromptu memorial Wednesday, while his teammates in Winnipeg mournedtreatment programs and the role of fighting came to the surface. Information on what exactly happened to Rypien is still scanty, but for many of us, his death brought back memories of athletes who battled depression and wound up taking their own lives, such as Kenny McKinley and Dave Duerson.

We don't know yet if depression led to Rypien's death, but it's played a major role in the deaths of others. Before Rypien's death, Sports Illustrated's Pablo S. Torre wrote an excellent piece in this week's magazine on the suicides of Duerson, former San Jose Shark Tom Cavanaugh, former New York Yankee Hideki Irabu, American Olympic skier Speedy Peterson, former Duke basketball captain Thomas Emma and Austrian Olympic judoka Claudia Heill, and how they raise larger issues of how we look at depression in sports. Bruce Arthur had a great column on the same subject, but expanded it to life in general, and that's a conversation we absolutely need to have as a society. Depression is still heavily stigmatized, but it's hit more people than you think. I've had my own struggles with depression in the past, and it's not an easy monster to lick at all. It's a problem we have to take seriously, and it's something where we have to figure out a way to support the people affected.

Read more...

On the Canucks, hatred, and why I want no part of the riots

I'm a fan of the Vancouver Canucks. I have been for most of my 23 years on this planet. The team's had some tremendous highs in that time, including runs to the Stanley Cup Finals in 1994 and again this year, but they've also had some tremendous lows (the whole Mark Messier and Mike Keenan era, for one). Still, if anything's more likely to make me abandon my fandom than an awful team struggling under the mismanagement of Keenan, it's a few entitled idiots who take a loss in Game Seven of the Stanley Cup Finals as an excuse to start destroying property. I'm watching the images on CBC right now, and it's absolutely horrifying. It's that sort of hatred and destruction that's the worst part of sports, and for it to show up here sickens me.

If I could do away with one thing in this world, it would be hate. Hate not only leads to suffering, but it blinds us, convinces us to think irrationally, and tells us that whatever disgusting feelings we have are just fine, because whoever they're aimed at isn't worthy of consideration. It's hate that spawns hyper-partisanship, where fans blindly clothe themselves in their teams' colours and ignore whatever happens on the other side. It's hate that leads to messes like the football hooliganism we've seen over in Europe, or the reported attacks on Canucks' fans out in Boston (which probably happened in Vancouver too).It's hate that leads us to believe that sports are more than just a game, more than just a fun diversion, but rather some divinely-ordained way of determining that one group of people is better than another group. That's not acceptable with races, religions, political beliefs or anything else, so why should it be the case in sports?

Read more...

Stanley Cup Finals preview: myself on the Canucks

Here's the conclusion of this point/counterpoint setting up the Stanley Cup Finals. Earlier, my old Queen's Journal colleague Mike Woods made the case for the Bruins. Here's my take on why I think the Canucks will win.

The NHL playoffs are a funny thing, and the best team doesn't always win. In fact, as I've written before, contrary to the demands of narrative, the best team probably wins about 55 per cent of the time. That leaves 45 per cent of the time where upsets happen, and the odds may be even higher in a series like this that looks like it should be close. Thus, anything could happen here. If you're a betting man or someone making predictions, though, you want that 55 per cent chance over a 45 per cent one, and that's why I'm going with the Canucks.

What Vancouver accomplished this regular season was nothing short of historic. They finished first in the NHL with 117 points, 10 ahead of their nearest competitor (Washington) and 14 ahead of the Bruins. They scored an NHL-best 262 goals and conceded a NHL-low 185 (if you're not entirely convinced of the predictive value of goal differential, it's notable that Boston's +51 was second-best in the league, but miles behind Vancouver's +77). Even an 82-game or 162-game (as in baseball) regular season may not be enough to really give us a solid indication of who the best teams really are, but it's a pretty good sample size, and it suggests that these Canucks are a pretty incredible group.

Special teams also look like a particular advantage for Vancouver. The Canucks put up a NHL-best 24.3 per cent mark on the power play during the regular season, an area where Boston particularly struggled; the Bruins were 20th with a 16.2 per cent mark. Those trends have continued in the postseason, where Vancouver's third with a 28.3 mark (behind only first-round exitees Anaheim and Phoenix), while Boston is 14th with a miserable 8.2 mark (ahead of only the Rangers and Pittsburgh). Postseason penalty killing has also been an edge for Vancouver, where they've put up a 80.6 per cent mark against Boston's 79.4 per cent; that advantage was even more stark in the regular season, where Vancouver's 85.6 per cent mark (third in the league) was notably better than Boston's 82.8 per cent (16th). As close playoff games often come down to what you can do with the man advantage, it's hard not to like the Canucks there.

Vancouver's roster is strong throughout as well. Despite criticism of goaltender Roberto Luongo, his playoff save percentage is a sparkling .920, eighth-best all time. Boston's Tim Thomas may hold an even better .928 mark, but Luongo is no goaltending slouch, and he's got plenty of support. The Canucks' defining characteristic is their depth, as in addition to superb production from Henrik Sedin (a playoff-best 21 points), Daniel Sedin (16) and Ryan Kesler (18), they're also getting key contributions from the likes of Mason Raymond (eight points) and Chris Higgins (seven points). Their defence is also deep and consistent, with everyone from Christian Ehrhoff to Alex Edler to Kevin Bieksa having tremendous playoffs. Moreover, this year has been proof that bruins can be defeated by prominent B.C. products. I think it's going to be close, as Boston's a great team too, but I think the Canucks have enough edges to take this series.

Prediction: Canucks in seven

Winnipeg, Phoenix, Seattle and why relocation is awful

It looks like the Phoenix Coyotes are going to be around Glendale, Arizona for at least another year. TSN's Dave Naylor writes that the city council there voted 5-2 to give the team a $25 million subsidy if they haven't found a buyer by the end of the 2011-12 season. As Joe Yerdon writes, that subsidy should keep them there for at least another year, if not longer, and that means Winnipeg probably isn't getting a team this summer. Of course, that won't make everyone happy; it was only decided after a hilarious council meeting (described perfectly by friend of the blog Dennis Tarwood) that featured plenty of comments both for and against the idea, and it's sure to meet with criticism from the Goldwater Institute, many Canadian hockey fans and media outlets, economists and others. However, while there are substantial issues around hockey in Phoenix that still need to be addressed, keeping the team there is a good thing from this perspective.

It's not that economic arguments should be written off entirely. Having a league directly subsidize a team (as the NHL has been doing with Phoenix over the last while) is very problematic for the perception of that league, and it's also troubling from a financial point of view. Having a city council potentially hand out that kind of money to what's supposedly a professional, for-profit sports franchise isn't necessarily a great idea either; I can't speak for the taxpayers of Glendale, but they can decide if that's the best use of their money or not. It's certainly not the greatest long-term solution. However, there are positives to keeping the team in Phoenix, and those need to be recognized.

Read more...

When narrative goes too far, and inequalities fail

Regular readers will know that I'm pretty interested in how narratives shape our perception of sports. One of the most significant ones lately has been in the Vancouver-Chicago series in the NHL playoffs, where the Canucks led 3-0 before the Blackhawks won three straight games to force tonight's seventh game. Of course, that's led to plenty of pieces on how this is a defining moment for Vancouver, a historic occasion and all the rest. Those stories aren't necessarily wrong, as there certainly is a significant mental aspect to sports, and that mental element will be involved tonight; I give it more credence than Joe Posnanski does, even if I share some of his other opinions on storylines. What's happened in the series so far does have a bearing on tonight's game in my mind, so it's perfectly relevant to talk about the pressure, the situation and the rest.

What I don't like is when that analysis takes the next step, though, and ascribes narrative reasons to why one team lost and another won and narrative solutions as to how to remedy this in the future. We've seen this plenty of times before, with certain teams or players being labeled simply as "chokers" for poor performances in small playoff sample sizes, or authoritative declarations that there was some clear flaw in the team that lost; they didn't have enough depth, enough grit, good-enough goaltending or anything else. None of those claims are necessarily wrong or problematic on their own, as it's certainly worthwhile to try and analyze what went wrong and think about how it could potentially be solved. What bothers me is more along the lines of the shades of grey discussion; in essence, any particular claim about size, scoring, goaltending or the rest isn't necessarily wrong and could in fact be right, but pointing to one of those things as the definitive cause of a team's downfall and something that has to be remedied if they're going to win in the future is generally inaccurate.

Read more...

Canucks - Blackhawks Game IV live blog

The last one of these was a lot of fun, so we're doing it again! Join me and a cast of Internet types for a live blog of tonight's Vancouver - Chicago game. Will the Canucks sweep the series, or will the Blackhawks live to fight another day? Find out in the live blog below, starting at 8 p.m. Eastern (5 p.m. Pacific). All are welcome to join!

Canucks - Blackhawks Game II live blog

I'll be live-blogging tonight's Canucks - Blackhawks clash with an assortment of interweb friends, including Beau Brace and Josh Koebert. Vancouver's up 1-0 in the series after a 2-0 win Wednesday night, but Chicago certainly can't be written off yet.  Everyone's welcome; drop in and give us your thoughts on the game, the series and the rest of the playoffs so far. The puck drops in Vancouver at 7 p.m. local (10 p.m. Eastern), so swing by and join us then!

NHL playoff preview: setting up the first round

The NHL playoffs get rolling tonight, with the Tampa Bay Lightning and Pittsburgh Penguins going head-to-head in one early game, the Phoenix Coyotes and Detroit Red Wings facing off in another clash and the New York Rangers and Washington Capitals in a third. There are also a pair of late games, featuring the Vancouver Canucks and Chicago Blackhawks and the Nashville Predators and Anaheim Ducks. There should be some excellent hockey on display tonight, and hopefully for much of the rest of the playoffs as well. Here's a preview of each first-round matchup, organized by game time (broadcast info from The 506):

(4) Pittsburgh Penguins - (5) Tampa Bay Lightning

First game: Wednesday, 7 p.m. Eastern, CBC (Ontario east, except Windsor)

This is an interesting one. The Penguins have a stronger defence and better goaltending (I'll happily take Marc-Andre Fleury over Dwayne Roloson), but their offence doesn't look as promising without Sidney Crosby and Evgeni Malkin (at least to start). Meanwhile, Tampa Bay is deep up front with the likes of Steven Stamkos, Martin St. Louis and Vincent Lecavalier, but their depth is an issue just about everywhere else. I like Pittsburgh in this one, but the Lightning shouldn't be an easy out.

Prediction: Penguins in six

Read more...

Canucks: Hank wins the Hart

It was a big day for the Canucks, with Henrik Sedin taking home the Hart Memorial Trophy as the NHL's most valuable player. I've got some thoughts on the matter and how the voting broke down over at Canuck Puck; check them out!

Hockey: Montreal's return to prominence

The Montreal Canadiens are in tough against the Philadelphia Flyers in the first-ever NHL conference final between a #7 seed (Philly) and an #8 seed (Montreal). They're down 2-0 in the series, they've given up nine goals and they haven't yet been able to beat Flyers' goaltender Michael Leighton. As Bruce Arthur wrote in his column in today's National Post, Philadelphia's rounding into form nicely and Montreal hasn't been impressive. If that continues, it seems likely the Canadiens' Cinderella run will end here.

Yet, there are several factors that have me thinking this one isn't over yet. For one, Philadelphia's lineup doesn't overly impress me, especially without the injured Jeff Carter. They have talented players like Mike Richards, Danny Briere, Simon Gagne and, as much as it pains me to say it, Chris Pronger, but much of their roster is filled with guys who are most known for their thuggery. Montreal wasn't any better during the regular season (both teams finished with 88 points and the Canadiens had a worse goal differential), but they have plenty of weapons up front with the likes of Scott Gomez, Mike Cammalleri, Tomas Plekanec and Brian Gionta, and I've got more faith in Jaroslav Halak as a playoff saviour [Dan Steinberg, D.C. Sports Bog] than I do in Michael Leighton, who looks more like a very naughty boy than a messiah. Moreover, Montreal's already come back to knock off Washington and Pittsburgh, much better teams than Philadelphia in my mind.

For me, the biggest thing still in Montreal's favour is that they're returning to home ice tonight, though. Yes, home ice doesn't always mean that much these days, but there's something special about the atmosphere in Montreal, driven by the unique history of the Canadiens and their relationship to their city and province. To try and explain it, here's an excerpt from D’Arcy Jenish's book, The Montreal Canadiens: 100 Years of Glory, sent my way by the good people at Random House. You can find more information on the book and buy it through their site. Without further ado, here's what makes Montreal unique and how the Canadiens got to where they are today:

This is Hockeytown

Other cities may lay claim to the title, says Pierre Boivin during an animated discussion in his corner office on the seventh floor of the Bell Centre, home of the Montreal Canadiens. Then, with a sweep of his arm, he gestures at the city beyond his windows. “Make no mistake about it, this is Hockeytown.”

Montreal is Hockeytown by dint of history and the citizenry’s enduring passion for the sport. It is where a raw and ragged game – shinny played on the icebound creeks and rivers and lakes of a wintry nation – came indoors and became hockey, the world’s first arena sport. It is where the first rules were written, where the first team was formed – the McGill University Redmen in 1877 – and where the sport’s most hallowed prize, the Stanley Cup, has come to rest thirty-nine times since it was first awarded in 1893, a prize captured by the Canadiens, Maroons, Wanderers, Shamrocks, Victorias and the Winged Wheelers of the Montreal Amateur Athletic Association.

In the 1890s, when the sport was young and the Stanley Cup brand new, the Winged Wheelers, Victorias and Shamrocks and their rabid followers were hockey’s hottest rivals. A few decades later, in the Roaring Twenties and Dirty Thirties, English Montreal had its team, the Maroons, and French Montreal had its standard-bearer, the Canadiens, and games between them produced war both on the ice and in the stands.

For seven decades now, ever since the demise of the Maroons, Montreal’s sporting public has worshipped at one altar, that of the Canadiens, and the passage of time has done nothing to diminish the ardour of the citizenry. “When we win on Saturday night, you get on the subway Monday morning and three-quarters of the people are smiling,” says Boivin, president and CEO of the Canadiens. “If we lose a couple and Toronto’s ahead by a point, Montrealers are very unhappy. If we don’t make the playoffs, spring is hell. To some degree, the city’s productivity is influenced by the team’s performance. Hockey is part of what makes this city tick.”

And yet, in the first years of the current century, hockey in Montreal was in jeopardy. Le Club de Hockey Canadien was grievously ill and in danger of folding. The team was mediocre and missing the playoffs more often than not. Attendance was declining. Financial losses were mounting. Furthermore, there appeared to be no way out. The Canadiens were damned by circumstances beyond their control. Player salaries had risen to untenable levels, owing to the free-spending ways of wealthier rivals, most of them in the United States. The Canadiens, like the five other NHL teams based in this country, were paying their athletes in U.S. dollars but earning their revenues in a domestic dollar worth about twenty-five percent less. On top of all this, the Canadiens were saddled with over eight million dollars per year in municipal taxes, whereas the league average was less than a million per team.

“We were losing a ton of money year in, year out,” Boivin recalls. “There was no way we could make money because of structural economic and competitive disadvantages. We had no hope of surviving.”

The Canadiens and their Colorado-based owner, George N. Gillett Jr., solidly supported the lockout of the players that cost the NHL its entire 2004—05 season. The NHL Players’ Association eventually capitulated and accepted a new collective bargaining agreement with a yearly salary cap, initially set at $39 million (U.S.) per team. This drastic measure trimmed the Canadiens’ payroll by about $12 million annually and helped save the franchise.

“Toronto was the only Canadian club that could have survived long-term and been competitive under the old regime,” Boivin adds. “We would have seen the relocation or the demise of the other five teams, and Montreal was no exception.”

Hockey returned to the city in the fall of 2005. The Canadiens played their first home game against the Ottawa Senators on the evening of October 10, a Tuesday. About ninety minutes before the puck dropped, the main doors of the Bell Centre opened and a crowd several hundred strong surged into the lobby. Boivin was there to welcome them. So were Gillett and general manager Bob Gainey and former players Henri Richard, Yvan Cournoyer and Réjean Houle. By game time, they had greeted several thousand people, a slice of the sellout crowd of 21,273.

The return of the NHL was cause for jubilation in the city that gave birth to the game. The league’s financial foundation had been restored and the future of its oldest and greatest franchise seemed assured. And the Canadiens had something else to celebrate: the one-hundredth anniversary of Le Club de Hockey Canadien – formed on December 4, 1909.

That fall, the Canadiens launched their centennial celebrations. The first significant public event occurred prior to a Saturday night game on November 12, when the Canadiens retired jersey number twelve. Left winger Dickie Moore, a two-time scoring champion, wore that sweater from 1951 to 1963, and right winger Yvan Cournoyer from 1964 to 1979. In the run-up to 2009, the team also retired numbers worn by Bernard Geoffrion (five), Serge Savard (eighteen), Ken Dryden (twenty-nine), Larry Robinson (nineteen) and Gainey (twenty-three). These joined numbers already taken out of circulation to honour Jacques Plante (one), Doug Harvey (two), Jean Béliveau (four), Howie Morenz (seven), Maurice Richard (nine), Guy Lafleur (ten) and Henri Richard (sixteen).

Two major events were planned for the centennial year. The league awarded Montreal the 2009 All-Star Game and scheduled the contest for January 25, the one-hundredth anniversary of the first match to go into the books as part of the Canadiens’ official record. The league also named Montreal as host of the 2009 Entry Draft.

Amid this prolonged centenary, a remarkable transformation was taking place. Gillett, who was seen as an interloper when he acquired the club and its building in January 2001, was proving to be a good owner, and he was winning the respect of Montrealers. Boivin and his executive group were overhauling the Canadiens’ business organization, while Gainey and his staff in the hockey department were rebuilding the team through trades, free-agent signings and, above all, the draft.

As the Canadiens completed their ninty-ninth season, these efforts were beginning to yield results. Le Club de Hockey Canadien had reclaimed its status as one of the best in the sport. The Canadiens were contenders again, and another Stanley Cup – a twenty-fifth for the team and a fortieth for the city – seemed a distinct possibility.

Excerpted from The Montreal Canadiens by D'Arcy Jenish. Copyright © 2008 by D'Arcy Jenish. Excerpted by permission of Anchor Canada. All rights reserved. No part of this excerpt may be reproduced or reprinted without permission in writing from the publisher.

We'll see if Montreal can live up to that tonight. I wouldn't bet against them, though. History is on their side.

The NHL's greatest upset?

TSN's Gino Reda tweeted an interesting question following the Flyers' improbable 4-3 comeback victory [Broad Street Hockey] over the Bruins [Jon Bois, SB Nation] tonight; was this the greatest comeback in NHL history? I'm tempted to say yes.

To start with, coming back from a 3-0 series deficit in a best-of-seven in any sport is incredibly rare. It's never been done in the NBA, it's been accomplished exactly once in Major League Baseball and it's happened three times now in hockey. The other two occasions were the Toronto Maple Leafs' comeback against Detroit in 1942 and the New York Islanders' comeback against Pittsburgh in 1975. Let's take a look at them and see how they stack up.

First, the Maple Leafs' comeback in 1942. This was in the Stanley Cup Finals, so they get bonus points for that, and it was also the first Cup Finals to go seven games, so that's worth even more points. That was a tremendous Maple Leafs' team, featuring Turk Broda, Bucko McDonald, Bob Goldham and Syl Apps Sr.. This was also one of the great old-time rivalries.

However, the series result wasn't really an upset; the Leafs were second in the league that year with a 27-18-3 record and 57 points, while Detroit was fifth (in a seven-team league) with a 19-25-4 record and 42 points. These were not the legendary Red Wings of Howe and Lindsay; they had good players like Sid Abel, Syd Howe (no relation to Gordie) and Mud Bruneteau, but they were more basement-dwellers than stars. Also, the Leafs had home-ice advantage and the Flyers did not. The series itself wasn't as dramatic as this one either; the Leafs lost the first three games 3-2, 4-2 and 5-2, but won the next four in convincing fashion (4-3, 9-3, 3-0, 3-1) thanks to some inspired lineup changes [Joe Pelletier, Greatest Hockey Legends]. That's still an incredible feat, but it doesn't quite have the flair of Philly's 5-4 (overtime), 4-0, 2-1 and 4-3 wins, with the last one coming after falling behind on the road. This is close, but I don't think it edges Philly - Boston.

How about those 1975 New York Islanders? Well, they were a good team and they get bonus points for making the playoffs for the first time that year. They featured plenty of notable players like Clark Gillies, Bob Nystrom, Billy Smith, Denis Potvin and Chico Resch, but they didn't yet have Bossy or Trottier.

The Islanders' win over Pittsburgh was a slight upset (an eight seed beating a six), but the Penguins only put up one more point in the regular season, and that wasn't a very good Penguins team (although, oddly enough, it had Syl Apps Jr.!). Their leading point-getter was Ron Schock, who, funnily enough, said that Pittsburgh was one of the two places he'd least like to go and was traded there two days later. New York got that one done on the road, which improves their qualifications, but they went on to lose to Philadelphia in the next round. Also, the comeback in Game Seven wasn't there; the Islanders won their last four 3-1, 4-2, 4-1 and 1-0. This is an impressive effort as well, but it also falls short.

Tonight's game was just all-around amazing. Philadelphia looked completely out of it at first, surrendering three goals in the first 15 minutes. They battled back, though. Michael Leighton closed up shop the rest of the way after looking awful early, making 22 saves to keep the Flyers in it, and he got some help from his defence. Even more importantly, though, their offence came through; they created next to nothing early on, but James van Riemsdyk knocked in a somewhat fluky goal before the first intermission, Scott Hartnell stepped up to add one in the second period and Daniel Briere tied the game near the midway point. Then, in perfect fashion, Boston channeled former Bruins' coach Don Cherry [The Gazette] and got caught with too many men on the ice, something that's been a trend lately [Darren Dreger, TSN.ca] in these playoffs (and also across sports [myself, Grey Cup 2009]!). Of course Simon Gagne scored on the power play, as that was too perfect not to happen. This one had drama in the playoff run thanks to all the Flyers' injuries, the series thanks to close games and the Bruins being favoured (and predicted to win by just about everyone, including myself), and the final game itself thanks to Boston's early lead. To me, that makes it the best NHL comeback of all time.

If we're going for comebacks across sports though, I'd have to give the edge to the 2004 Red Sox comeback against the Yankees. That was too perfect given the intense rivalry between the teams, the Curse of the Bambino and Boston's long history of playoff futility. This can't quite match that in my mind, but I'm quite willing to call it the greatest comeback in NHL history, and perhaps also the best real-life opportunity to use this:

Canucks - Blackhawks: Game Six

The Canucks came through in the crunch last time on the road, but can they pull it off again at home? They're still down 3-2 in the series, even if they may be buoyed by the return of Sami Salo. Will the Canucks continue their run, or will the Blackhawks close out the series? Find out in the live blog below!

Canucks - Blackhawks: Game Five, This Is What It Comes To

With their backs against the wall, this is what it all comes down to for the Vancouver Canucks. Down three games to one, in hostile territory on the road, they need to get a win here. If they can't pull it off, the dream of lifting the Stanley Cup will die for another year. Can they do it? Find out in the live blog below:

Canucks - Blackhawks: Game Four live blog

A short preview and a collection of links for tonight's Canucks-Blackhawks game is posted over at Canuck Puck. Join me there or here at 9:30 Eastern/6:30 Pacific for tonight's live blog!

Canucks - Blackhawks live blog: Game II, The Odyssey Continues

The Canucks take on the Chicago Blackhawks tonight in what should be an excellent Game Two. My game preview is up over at Canuck Puck, and I'll again be live-blogging the game both here and there. All are welcome to come join in. The puck drops at 9 p.m. Eastern/6 p.m. Pacific: hope to see you then!

Canadian Hosers 4, Outdated Monarchical Institutions 2

So, the Canucks finally knocked off the Los Angeles Kings for good. My thoughts on the game and the series are up over at Canuck Puck, along with some excellent topical videos, but if you don't want to read that, here's another video for you.



What can we take from this series? Sum it up, please, Dennis.

"Listen -- strange league executives lying about icy ponds and distributing video-review judgements is no basis for a system of government. Supreme executive power derives from a mandate from the masses, not from some farcical bureaucratic ceremony!"

Well, Dennis comes on a little strong, but he's right about one thing. For now, it's time to say goodbye to the Kings.

Playfair Heats Up

I live in Surrey, B.C., and I'm not exactly rich enough to afford Canucks tickets, so most of the hockey I see live is at Abbotsford Heat (AHL) games. It's a good brand of hockey, and there's always potential for some entertaining moments. Unfortunately, I wasn't there in person for what's quite possibly the highlight of the Heat's tenure in Abbotsford so far, head coach Jim Playfair (the former head coach of the Calgary Flames, Abbotsford's parent team) melting down after referee Jamie Koharski (son of former NHL ref Don Koharski, who's of course famous for being involved in another legendary meltdown) tossed Heat winger J.D. Watt. Here's the video; skip ahead to 2:30 for the start of the play, or 3:20 for the start of the fireworks.



This is pretty impressive. Playfair yells at the ref, breaks a stick, takes off his jacket and then breaks another stick before leaving, probably enough to get this up into the pantheon of the top coaching rants of all time. However, hockey alone offers some stiff competition. Here's some of the other all-time greats:

Jim Schoenfeld on Don Koharski: This is the incident mentioned above, from the 1988 playoffs. "You fell, you fat pig! Have another doughnut!"



John Tortorella ejected for hitting a fan with a water bottle: Funnily enough, this one led to a one-game suspension for Tortorella and resulted in Schoenfeld taking over the team.



Don Cherry's Bruins called for too many men in Game Seven: This is one of the great coaching blunders of all time, and still came to mind 30 years after the fact when a similar error (also against Montreal) lost this year's Grey Cup for Saskatchewan. Unfortunately, his reaction is rather muted. The famous arm-waving introduction to Coach's Corner is from earlier in this game, though.



So, what say you? Where does Playfair's meltdown rank? In pure significance, it's probably below these three, as it happened in the AHL regular season instead of the NHL playoffs. We also don't have any memorable quotes from it (yet). Still, for sheer physical spectacle, this one comes out on top in my mind. Overall, I'd probably slot it behind Schoenfeld and Tortorella, but ahead of Cherry thanks to his muted reaction to the call. Leave your thoughts in the comments or get at me on Twitter!

Update: Completely forgot about Robbie Ftorek's bench-tossing, which Sean Leahy included in his Puck Daddy post along with a couple of minor-league meltdowns I hadn't seen before. This is pretty good; maybe even good enough to take top spot.

Hockey: Interviewing Brent Seabrook, and why the Olympics top the NHL

Last week, I spoke with Chicago Blackhawks' defenceman Brent Seabrook for a South Delta Leader piece about what it was like for him to compete in the Olympics at home, so I figured I'd spotlight that here. Let's take a look at what he had to say, consider why Olympic hockey is special and think about if there's a way to use those lessons to make the NHL more exciting.

One of the most interesting comments I thought Seabrook made was about how Olympic competition is in some ways even more intense than the NHL playoffs, thanks to the single-elimination format and the national, not city-wide, focus on the games.

"There was so much at stake in such a short time after the round-robin," Seabrook said. "The qualification and the medal round, it's one game and you're out. Everybody was putting it on the line and making every shift count."

That single-elimination format also makes it tougher to recover from a bad shift or a bad game.

"It was unbelievable," Seabrook said. "It sort of felt like we were back in the playoffs playing like that but at the same time, there's almost more on the line during the Olympics. It's one game and you're out. In the playoffs, if you have a bad game, you still have at least three more to bounce back and be better. It's a little different format which makes it not as nerve-racking, not as crazy."

He said that additional pressure requires players to avoid getting too low after a loss or too high after a win.

"I think you're nervous and what not, but I think it puts you on more of an even keel," he said. "You're playing against arguably the best teams that are put together in the world. You've got your Russia, your Slovakia, your USA, your Canada—all of those teams have a lot of top players. To get up after a big win is tough because its such a short tournament. If you start doing that, you start losing focus and you can find yourself going over."

To me, that pressure and intensity is what makes the Olympic tournament so interesting. The NHL's playoffs are great, too, and they're probably a fairer way to determine a champion (sample size alone dictates that the top teams are more likely to prevail in a best-of-seven series than in a single-elimination tournament), but that fairness comes with a tradeoff; it means there's less on the line in each game (except a Game Seven), and it also means that underdogs are less likely to win.

There's a good reason that most of the memorable underdog runs in the playoffs (1982 Canucks, 1994 Canucks, 1996 Panthers, 2002 Hurricanes, 2003 Mighty Ducks, 2004 Flames, 2006 Oilers) ended with Stanley Cup Final losses; the best-of-seven format makes it awfully tough for underdogs to go all the way. I'm not advocating making the NHL playoffs a single-game knockout tournament; the current format is interesting, and it provides a couple months of good hockey. For sheer thrills, though, I'm not sure it can compare to the Olympics.

Moreover, the Olympics have another big advantage over the NHL; they show us a hockey game with less talent dilution. Sure, there are weak teams in the tournament, but the upper-echelon countries like Canada, the U.S., Russia and Sweden all have more talent than any NHL team (mostly because there are far less elite countries than NHL teams). The focus on offence instead of grinding and goonery also helps; teams tend to roll three or four lines of talented players instead of going with the typical NHL mix of two talented lines and two lines of muckers. Bruce Arthur wrote an interesting piece after the Olympics criticizing the NHL's brand of regular-season hockey, which is almost anathema for Canadian writers; many spend much of their time talking about how great the game is without looking at its flaws. I'd argue that many of those flaws carry over into the playoffs, too, particularly on the talent-dilution side. There are plenty of good reasons the Olympic hockey ratings were so massive and so far beyond what we usually see for hockey, and they go beyond pure nationalism; the Olympics offer a product the NHL can't match.

That doesn't mean there's nothing that can be done. I've gone to a lot of AHL games this year, and one thing I've noticed is that most AHL teams have plenty of players with a good bit of offensive talent. The problem is that, as I pointed out in a Canuck Puck piece before this season started, most NHL teams have very clearly defined forward line identities. The top two lines are expected to score, the bottom two are expected to check and fight. Thus, if an offensively-minded AHL forward isn't quite good enough to crack his NHL team's top-six forwards, he's probably going to remain an AHL forward.

Changing that mentality to one that emphasizes offence from all players might produce a more exciting game, and rule tweaks to reduce headshots and open up the game could also help. That's not a call for banning hitting or fighting; both have their place in the sport in my mind. What I'd like to see in the NHL is more of a focus on players who can both score and hit, like Alex Ovechkin, Brenden Morrow and David Backes. In the meantime, though, pencil me in amongst the crowd that wants to see NHL players in the 2014 Olympics in Russia; the tournament simply offers a fantastically thrilling brand of hockey we can't see anywhere else.

The Burrows-Auger controversy

My thoughts on the Alex Burrows/Stephane Auger controversy (where Burrows accused Auger of saying he was out to get him) are up over at Canuck Puck. You can read the current state of affairs there, but this situation is going to be very interesting to follow over the next few days. As Joe Yerdon points out in his post on the matter, the NHL needs to conduct a full investigation; we've already seen how sweeping accusations against refs under the rug has hurt the NBA and European soccer. As I wrote about Tim Donaghy, even the perception of impropriety can stagger a league, regardless of what actually happened. The league needs to take this seriously and show us just what happened, or their own fans will lose faith. We'll see what they do in the days to come.