I'll be live-blogging tonight's Game I clash between the Vancouver Canucks and the Chicago Blackhawks, perhaps with some of the other Out of Left Field staff. The puck will drop at 9:00 p.m. Eastern (6:00 p.m. Pacific). The game will be on CBC in Canada and Versus in the United States. A full preview of the series is after the jump.
How they got here: Vancouver swept St. Louis in four games, but the series was closer than it appeared. Every game was a hard-fought battle and the Blues, the league's hottest team over the last couple of months of the regular season, gave Vancouver a run for their money. Conversely, it took Chicago six games to knock off the Calgary Flames, but Games Five and Six were 5-1 and 4-1 blowouts for the Blackhawks. Chicago's had two full off-days to recuperate, so fatigue shouldn't be too much of an issue for them. Vancouver's been off for nine days, which could make the Canucks a little slow out of the gate tonight. However, the long layoff also means that some key players will be able to return to the Vancouver lineup tonight (Matthew Sekeres, The Globe and Mail), including Mats Sundin, Sami Salo and Taylor Pyatt.
Advantage: Slight edge to Chicago.
The forwards: The Blackhawks have an impressive group of young players up front, including five guys who notched 20 or more goals this season (Jonathan Toews, Martin Havlat, Patrick Sharp,Patrick Kane and Kris Versteeg). Versteeg led the team with seven points in Round I, but Kane and Sharp added six each. Dustin Byfuglien, Andrew Ladd and Dave Bolland also each had 15 goals or more during the regular season. Defensively, their key forward is Sami Pahlsson, who played a crucial role in the Anaheim Ducks' 2007 Stanley Cup victory, but Ben Eager, Troy Brouwer and Adam Burish are also good at the bang-and-crash side of the game.
For the Canucks, the top line of Alex Burrows and Daniel and Henrik Sedin was the key scoring threat this season. Both Sedins put up 82-point seasons (31 goals and 51 assists for Daniel, 22 and 60 for Henrik), while Burrows added 28 goals and 23 assists. Ryan Kesler and Pavol Demitra also had 20-goal campaigns, while Mats Sundin put up a respectable nine goals and 19 assists in 41 games in a second-line role after joining the team midway through the year. Other forwards who can chip in offensively include Steve Bernier (15 goals, 32 points), Kyle Wellwood (18 goals, 27 points) and Mason Raymond (11 goals, 23 points). On the defensive side, Burrows, Kesler and Wellwood have all proven their worth as great two-way players and Ryan Johnson is one of the league's top shot-blockers and defensive forwards.
Most of the previews you'll read for this series give the Blackhawks a substantial edge in forwards, but this year's regular-season stats suggest that the two groups are pretty even. Both teams have solid top lines and excellent scoring depth, as well as several forwards who can backcheck.
Advantage: Push
The defence:
The Canucks' defence corps has an interesting mix of guys who can contribute at both ends of the ice. Kevin Bieksa and Alex Edler provided much of the offence from the blue line this year, notching 43 and 37 points respectively while recording 11 and 10 goals, but both are strong inside their own blue line as well. Mattias Ohlund and Willie Mitchell excel in their own end and contribute offensively from time to time. Sami Salo is notoriously injury-prone, but has one of the hardest shots in the league, while Shane O'Brien and Ossi Vaananen add depth.
The Blackhawks' defence is much younger, but just as impressive. Brian Campbell remains one of the league's elite offensive defencemen. He had a seven-goal, 45-point season and has improved his defensive play as well. Duncan Keith, Brent Seabrook and Cam Barker are stars in the making and Niklas Hjalmarsson and Matt Walker add depth. Many writers give the Canucks the edge on defence, but these lineups look pretty equivalent to me. Chicago allowed an average of 29.3 shots against per game during the first round, slightly better than Vancouver's 32.8 mark but not a considerable difference. The one advantage the Canucks have going for them on the back end is playoff experience. Chicago's defence performed well for the most part in the first round, but they showed some jitters in Games Three in Calgary where the Blackhawks conceded 4 and 6 goals respectively.
Advantage: Push
Goaltending:
Both teams have strong goaltenders. Roberto Luongo has been consistently outstanding throughout his time in Vancouver and turned in a tremendous performance against St. Louis in Round I, where he put up a .962 save percentage and a 1.15 goals-against average, leading the league in both categories. Khabibulin recorded a .914 save percentage and a 2.52 goals-against average in Round I while facing less shots per game, so he comes up a bit short there. He does have a Stanley Cup on his resume from Tampa Bay's run in 2004, something Luongo can't match. Khabibulin split time with Cristobal Huet during the regular-season, putting up a 25-8-10 record with three shutouts, a .919 save percentage and a 2.33 goals-against average. He's also 0-9-1 in his last 10 games against Vancouver. Luongo put up a 33-13-16 record in 54 regular-season games with a 2.34 GAA and a .920 save percentage, very similar to Khabibulin's numbers and slightly below his usual standards. However, he was fighting through a groin injury for much of the year and appears to be back in dominant form, so the Canucks get the edge here.
Advantage: Edge to Vancouver.
Power play: Both teams had terrific power-play performances in the first round. The Blackhawks converted seven of 24 opportunities for a 29.2 success rate, while Vancouver was four for 18 for a 22.2 percentage. During the regular season, Chicago was 70 for 363 on the power play (19.3%) and Vancouver was 67 for 357 (18.8%). There's not a huge difference here, but the numbers do favour the Blackhawks.
Advantage: Slight edge to Chicago
Penalty kill: During the regular season, both teams were close to the league average on the penalty kill. Vancouver allowed 69 power-play goals on 371 chances for a 81.4 penalty-killing percentage while Chicago allowed 64 goals on 330 power-play opportunities, giving them a 80.6 penalty-killing percentage. In the postseason, both teams have shot up to among the league leaders. Vancouver has only allowed one goal on 24 opportunities for a 95.8 penalty-killing percentage that's second-best in the league (behind only the Boston Bruins, who haven't allowed a goal in the eight power play attempts against them). The Blackhawks have allowed two goals on 18 opportunities for a 88.9 penalty-killing percentage, tied for fourth-best.
Advantage: Slight edge to Vancouver.
The tally: The forward and defence lineups of both teams are quite even, and Vancouver's penalty-killing edge negates Chicago's power-play edge. The Canucks may be slightly hurt by the long layoff, but the goaltending advantage is what makes the difference in this analysis.
The prediction: Vancouver in six.
Other notes: The last time the teams met on March 27, the game erupted into a brawl (Greg Wyshynski, Puck Daddy) that resulted in 12 penalties and at least one accusation of hair-pulling. Expect some of that bad blood to carry over. It should be a good series; the up-and-coming Hawks against the new-look Canucks, with the history between the sides as an added factor to sweeten the pot. Enjoy it, and come join the live blog tonight!
[Cross-posted to Sporting Madness]
Showing posts with label Ryan Kesler. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Ryan Kesler. Show all posts
Thursday, April 30, 2009
Saturday, April 11, 2009
The GBU: Canucks and Kings
I haven't done a GBU post in a while, and it's also been a while since I've written about the Canucks, so I figured I'd kill two birds with one stone after attending last night's win over the L.A. Kings Thursday [Jason Botchford, The Vancouver Province].
The score: Canucks 1, Kings 0.
How I saw it: In person.
The Good:
-Roberto Luongo: Luongo certainly looks back in form these days. After standing on his head to steal a win against the Flames Tuesday [Nucks Misconduct], he was solid against an offensively talented L.A. team. He received considerably more defensive support from the rest of the team Thursday than he had against Calgary, but he still had to make several spectacular saves and didn't get a lot of offensive backing. He was named the game's first star, and was a deserving selection.
-Ryan Kesler: Kesler was selected as the team's season MVP before the game, and he justified his selection with some solid play Thursday night. He was strong at both ends of the ice, skating up a storm, scoring the Canucks' only goal off a wrist shot from the slot and backchecking ferociously. I'm not sure if I would have selected him as the team's MVP as there were so many other deserving candidates (Luongo, the Sedins, Alex Burrows, etc), but he's certainly had a great season. He's very valuable to the team and will be key to their success in the playoffs.
-Ryan Johnson: Johnson doesn't get a ton of credit, but he's one of the team's top defensive forwards. He hustled through every shift, backchecked consistently and blocked some dangerous shots. He and the other energy types like Rick Rypien bring a lot to the Canucks, even though their contributions don't always show up on the scoresheet.
-Alex Edler: Edler's been a strong presence on the Canucks' blueline this season, and he showed his skills again on Thursday. He created offensive chances with some terrific passes and made stellar defensive plays as well. He's added a lot of depth to the blue line, which is always a good thing to have.
The Bad:
-Drew Doughty: The Kings' 19-year-old rookie blueliner has some tremendous skills. He's strong with and without the puck, and showed a particular talent for well-crafted breakout passes. He'll be one to watch in the future.
-Jonathan Quick: Quick's only 23, but he's turned into a very promising goalie this year. He put on a show against the Canucks, stopping 27 of 28 shots and making great saves against Kyle Wellwood and Rick Rypien, to name just a few. He's going to be a key part of a rising Kings squad.
-Anze Kopitar: It seems hard to believe that Kopitar is just 21 years old; he's been very impressive ever since he made it to the NHL. The guy has tremendous skating ability and a great set of hands. He's the Kings' main offensive threat at the moment, and he's only going to get better.
The Ugly:
-The Canucks' offence: Vancouver's offence has been better than usual this year, but this game looked a bit like the last couple of years where the team was pretty much only Luongo. They created some good chances and were stopped by Quick, but they were only able to capitalize once. It's not a crisis situation, as they still got the win and probably would have scored more against a weaker goaltender, but they'll need to give Luongo more offensive support if they want to succeed in the playoffs.
-The Kings' uniforms: I'm not a fan of the purple-and-white. Purple can be fine as a uniform colour if it's well-thought-out and coordinated with the rest of the uniform (the Baltimore Ravens' black and purple jerseys are a great example of this). Purple and white doesn't look good, though, especially in the Kings' current format. Bring back the silver and black!
-"Easter Fin": I've said enough about this already.
Up next: The Canucks face Colorado at noon today [Nucks Misconduct]. They only need one point to clinch the division title and the third playoff seed, and they'll also want to turn in a good showing against a struggling Avalanche team to get set for the playoffs.
Friday, April 04, 2008
Canucks: The post-mortem
Well, the Canucks continued their slide right out of the playoffs yesterday, losing their sixth game of the last seven to the Edmonton Oilers. Combined with Nashville's earlier win over the St. Louis Blues, the loss meant that Vancouver is now eliminated from playoff contention. Every suspicious death requires a post-mortem examination, so here's my take on the anatomy of a collapse.
Head: Dave Nonis
As James Mirtle wrote today, one of the big problems with this team was how they were built and the almost-complete lack of scoring depth. Responsibility for that has to fall on the GM's desk. Granted, he hasn't had all that much room to work so far, and has made some nice moves (Luongo, Willie Mitchell and Aaron Miller come to mind), but he hasn't done much of anything to improve the offense. Matt Pettinger was a decent trade-deadline pickup, and may be able to contribute offensively next season, but he isn't the whole solution. Nonis' draft record is also spotty, as Patrick White and Michael Grabner have both shown little potential so far. He needs to find guys who will come through in the clutch, instead of folding when the stakes are high. As Tony Gallagher wrote the other day, there's going to be a lot of scrutiny on Nonis this summer. I wouldn't axe him yet, but next year should be the defining moment for him: if he can't make substantial upgrades over the summer, make some solid draft picks and get the Canucks back into the playoffs, the team should look to someone else.
Brain: Alain Vigneault
Last year's Jack Adams Award winner fell off a bit this year, and wasn't able to get his team motivated down the stretch. They also lost a lot of games that they should have won throughout the year. Granted, he didn't have all that much to work with, but the coach should be the one pushing players, building confidence and ensuring that the team doesn't give away leads (like they did against Colorado the other night). The performance down the stretch suggests that the team might be starting to tune him out. I think Vigneault's a great coach, but he might have to get a bit more fire and brimstone to do anything with this team next year.
Right hand: Roberto Luongo
It was another great year from Louie. Unfortunately though, the team didn't give him a lot of support. They actually allowed less shots on him (2020 vs 2169), but that's in four less games, and they also gave up too many good chances a lot of the time. Luongo is the brightest spot on this team, and they'll need to start building around him fast: I don't know if he'll want to stay in Vancouver otherwise once his contract expires.
Left hand: Markus Naslund
Nazzy took a lot of heat this year, but he actually finished with not-bad stats (25 goals and 30 assists for 55 points, only five less than last year, and there's still one game left). He was still one of the best offensive players on the team, which shows the lack of depth. The problem is, he's playing like an excellent second-line scorer, but he's paid like a first-line scorer. I'm not sure if he'll be back next year, jump to another team or return to Sweden, but if he wants to return at a number that makes sense for the Canucks, he should be given the chance: he's meant a lot to this franchise over the years.
Heart: Trevor Linden
Linden's another free agent, and if this club has any sense, they'll bring him back. He was one of the best at fulfilling his role on the team this year, brought a lot of leadership, and even chipped in offensively at key times (such as the other night against Calgary). He's also one of Vancouver's best in the shootout, which is incredibly important considering that almost everyone else is terrible: Vigneault's questionable decision to make him a healthy scratch for several games that wound up going to shootouts (which the Canucks usually lost) may have made the difference between the Canucks making and missing the playoffs this year. In my mind, Linden should be given the "C" next year: he's the one player who came through when the chips were down.
Legs: Daniel and Henrik Sedin
The Sedins deserve their fair share of criticism for ineffectiveness down the stretch, but they'll probably get much more than that. They aren't the problem: the problem is the Canucks have no other credible offensive threats, so they draw the opposing team's shutdown pair and checking line each and every night. Towards the end of the season, teams figured that stopping the Sedins meant stopping Vancouver. If the Canucks get a legitimate second line next year, the Sedins should return to top form.
Feet: Ryan Kesler, Alex Burrows, Willie Mitchell and the rest of the supporting cast
The three guys mentioned were big standouts this year. Unfortunately, some of the others took a step back due to injuries (Kevin Bieksa, anyone)? Still, the defense is solid (except for Lukas Krajicek, but even he's improving), and young forwards like Mason Raymond and Ryan Shannon showed some flashes of brilliance. Kesler took a long time to mature, but he's become one of the best two-way centres in the league, and certainly justified that Bobby Clarke offer sheet. If the Canucks can build around some of their solid younger guys and bring in more scoring talent, they may again be a team to reckon with.
Head: Dave Nonis
As James Mirtle wrote today, one of the big problems with this team was how they were built and the almost-complete lack of scoring depth. Responsibility for that has to fall on the GM's desk. Granted, he hasn't had all that much room to work so far, and has made some nice moves (Luongo, Willie Mitchell and Aaron Miller come to mind), but he hasn't done much of anything to improve the offense. Matt Pettinger was a decent trade-deadline pickup, and may be able to contribute offensively next season, but he isn't the whole solution. Nonis' draft record is also spotty, as Patrick White and Michael Grabner have both shown little potential so far. He needs to find guys who will come through in the clutch, instead of folding when the stakes are high. As Tony Gallagher wrote the other day, there's going to be a lot of scrutiny on Nonis this summer. I wouldn't axe him yet, but next year should be the defining moment for him: if he can't make substantial upgrades over the summer, make some solid draft picks and get the Canucks back into the playoffs, the team should look to someone else.
Brain: Alain Vigneault
Last year's Jack Adams Award winner fell off a bit this year, and wasn't able to get his team motivated down the stretch. They also lost a lot of games that they should have won throughout the year. Granted, he didn't have all that much to work with, but the coach should be the one pushing players, building confidence and ensuring that the team doesn't give away leads (like they did against Colorado the other night). The performance down the stretch suggests that the team might be starting to tune him out. I think Vigneault's a great coach, but he might have to get a bit more fire and brimstone to do anything with this team next year.
Right hand: Roberto Luongo
It was another great year from Louie. Unfortunately though, the team didn't give him a lot of support. They actually allowed less shots on him (2020 vs 2169), but that's in four less games, and they also gave up too many good chances a lot of the time. Luongo is the brightest spot on this team, and they'll need to start building around him fast: I don't know if he'll want to stay in Vancouver otherwise once his contract expires.
Left hand: Markus Naslund
Nazzy took a lot of heat this year, but he actually finished with not-bad stats (25 goals and 30 assists for 55 points, only five less than last year, and there's still one game left). He was still one of the best offensive players on the team, which shows the lack of depth. The problem is, he's playing like an excellent second-line scorer, but he's paid like a first-line scorer. I'm not sure if he'll be back next year, jump to another team or return to Sweden, but if he wants to return at a number that makes sense for the Canucks, he should be given the chance: he's meant a lot to this franchise over the years.
Heart: Trevor Linden
Linden's another free agent, and if this club has any sense, they'll bring him back. He was one of the best at fulfilling his role on the team this year, brought a lot of leadership, and even chipped in offensively at key times (such as the other night against Calgary). He's also one of Vancouver's best in the shootout, which is incredibly important considering that almost everyone else is terrible: Vigneault's questionable decision to make him a healthy scratch for several games that wound up going to shootouts (which the Canucks usually lost) may have made the difference between the Canucks making and missing the playoffs this year. In my mind, Linden should be given the "C" next year: he's the one player who came through when the chips were down.
Legs: Daniel and Henrik Sedin
The Sedins deserve their fair share of criticism for ineffectiveness down the stretch, but they'll probably get much more than that. They aren't the problem: the problem is the Canucks have no other credible offensive threats, so they draw the opposing team's shutdown pair and checking line each and every night. Towards the end of the season, teams figured that stopping the Sedins meant stopping Vancouver. If the Canucks get a legitimate second line next year, the Sedins should return to top form.
Feet: Ryan Kesler, Alex Burrows, Willie Mitchell and the rest of the supporting cast
The three guys mentioned were big standouts this year. Unfortunately, some of the others took a step back due to injuries (Kevin Bieksa, anyone)? Still, the defense is solid (except for Lukas Krajicek, but even he's improving), and young forwards like Mason Raymond and Ryan Shannon showed some flashes of brilliance. Kesler took a long time to mature, but he's become one of the best two-way centres in the league, and certainly justified that Bobby Clarke offer sheet. If the Canucks can build around some of their solid younger guys and bring in more scoring talent, they may again be a team to reckon with.
Saturday, March 15, 2008
Stomp the rink
The NHL announced today that Anaheim Ducks defenceman Chris Pronger would be suspended for eight games for his stomp on Ryan Kesler of the Vancouver Canucks. Outstanding CKNW and Canucks TV colour man Tom Larscheid nailed it towards the end of the clip, calling it "A deliberate play by Pronger just to stomp on Kesler with his skate." In my mind at least, this was out-and-out dirty, right up there with the infamous Chris Simon on Jarkko Ruutu play. Of course, Simon's a fringe player, so the full book (a 30-game suspension) got thrown at him: Pronger wouldn't even have been suspended without the NHL suspiciously finding a "new angle" after they'd already ruled it was inconclusive. According to Pronger, the league told him Thursday night there would be no suspension, but then re-reviewed the tape on Friday and came up with the new punishment. I don't see how they deemed it inconclusive in the first place: even the original camera angle was far better than most of the footage of the Simon-Ruutu incident. Simon also hit Ruutu's skate, while Pronger went straight for Kesler's leg. Methinks perhaps Simon's widely reported comments and the increasing media and fan pressure targeting the obvious inequity here got league disciplinarian Colin Campbell to reconsider: there are those who agree, like the Battle of California's Earl Sleek.
It would be nice to have things treated fairly, at least," Simon told the Associated Press after the Wild practised on Friday. "I don't think in that instance it's fair at all. I couldn't believe right away that nothing was going to be done about it. I still can't believe it."
Simon should start believing it. Even with a suspension handed out, the NHL's two-tiered system of justice is still blatantly obvious. There's one code for superstars like Pronger and a different one for everyone else: consider Pronger's pair of one-game suspensions last playoffs for offenses that likely would have meant multiple games for anyone else. Campbell cited history as a factor in determining the length of the Simon decision, but Pronger's history is almost as bad: Simon has 8 suspensions in 15 years, while Pronger's racked up 7 in 14 (including three in the last calendar year). The relative lengths further demonstrate the special treatment Pronger gets. The longest suspension he'd ever received previously was four games, and his total suspensions including this one only total 20 regular season games and two post-season games. By contrast, Simon's two longest suspensions amounted to 25 and 30 games each, respectively.
The offenses aren't that dissimilar, either. ESPN has a great breakdown of the incidents involving Pronger, which include hitting Pat Peake in the throat with a stick, swinging a stick at Jeremy Roenick's helmet, cross-checking Brendan Morrow in the face and kicking Ville Nieminen. By contrast, Simon's suspensions are generally less physically harmful: his longest suspension prior to the March 2007 stick-swinging incident (similar to both of Pronger's stick incidents, but worth a 25-game suspension instead of a four-game ban) was three games for alleged racial remarks. Add the incidents up, and it's Pronger who looks like the bigger goon, but Simon with the harsher punishment.
The league's also giving Pronger the benefit of the doubt, as the Vancouver Province's Jason Botchford reports. "In attempting to free himself, Pronger carelessly and recklessly brought his foot down," Campbell said in a statement. As Botchford writes, "The other possibility is that Pronger wasn't careless at all, that he intended to injure in an act of frustration."
Campbell's release makes Pronger's actions sound like an accident, unlike his comments in Simon's case. "But he just snaps," he told the Canadian Press back then. "And we can't have that. Because now we're talking about the safety of other players on the ice. ... You would hope he wouldn't do it again but maybe he can't help himself. I don't know. He's never actually come out and said, 'I will never do this again.'"
Oh really, Mr. Campbell? Where's your concern for other players in the Pronger incident? This guy's done a lot to hurt players over the years: look at the concussion he gave Dean McCammond last playoffs. Playing with skates is a dangerous business: see Zednik, Richard, Perry, Corey, and Bieksa, Kevin, to name just a few. However, he's a star who sells jerseys and draws fans, so he gets the kid-gloves treatment while Campbell muses about ending Simon's career. That's not right, and it's not fair.
I have every bit of respect for Pronger's abilities as a player, but there can't be one standard for stars and one for role players. The Globe's Allan Maki summed that up nicely on the Globe on Hockey blog. "Simon deserved his suspension, no one’s quibbling about that," he wrote. "But letting Pronger go unpunished only raises more incriminating questions, such as: Is the NHL afraid of affecting Anaheim’s playoff push by suspending Pronger? Is the NHL afraid of invoking the wrath of Ducks’ general manager Brian Burke? Is the NHL hiding behind the old bit about not knowing what a player’s true intent is in such heat-of-the-moment moments? Based on what we’ve seen thus far, we certainly know what the NHL’s intent is: suspend the easy targets but let’s not be so hasty when it comes to our superstars."
Another intersting take is from New York Islanders' media relations VP, Chris Botta. Botta hits most of the points I've already elaborated on, but adds this about the initial Simon on Ruutu incident. "I'm going to step out just a bit here and share something that Chris said to me a few times," he wrote. "In all honesty, when he volunteered his thoughts I was torn between being sympathetic and concerned that Chris had lost his way. Basically, Chris felt that on judgment day he was treated differently than other players. I never let the conversation get to the subject of why." What's interesting here is what Botta doesn't say. Clearly, a PR guy wouldn't bring up anything this controversial (I'm impressed that he was so vocal about this in the first place), but one gets the impression Simon might have felt that race could have played a role (Simon is half Ojibwa): there have been suggestions that racism played a role in Islanders' coach Ted Nolan getting blacklisted from the NHL for years after winning the Jack Adams Trophy, and he certainly had to struggle with racist taunts while coaching junior hockey. I really hope that this isn't the case, that our society has moved beyond that, and that Colin Campbell treated Chris Simon the same way he would have treated a white role player (we already know it's not how he would have treated a superstar), but the shadow of possible racism still lingers.
In the league's defence, it wouldn't have been easy to suspend Pronger for 30 games, particularly with the playoffs looming: that would have taken the Ducks from favorites to repeat as Stanley Cup champions back down to the realms of the merely mortal contenders. They did it with Todd Bertuzzi, though, which certainly hurt the Canucks that year. That incident was different, and obviously more serious in terms of its consequences, but the precedent was set that the league didn't mind severely reducing a team's playoff chances via suspension if the situation warranted it. The Canucks of that year took the eventual Stanley Cup finalist Calgary Flames to seven games and overtime in the first round that year: who knows what they could have accomplished with Big Bert? Pronger should have gotten the same treatment as Simon, regardless of where the season was at.
Related:
- James Mirtle's take: interestingly, 77% of respondents to his poll (122 people) agree with me that the suspension was too short.
- Tom Benjamin's take
- Alanah's take
Update: As usual, the Globe's Eric Duhatschek nails this one: "Simon's act may have been slightly more egregious than Pronger's, but it's hard to understand why the sentence was almost four times as long – unless you're prepared to consider that Pronger is a former Hart Memorial Trophy winner and an important cog on the defending Stanley Cup champion Ducks, whereas Simon is a fringe player and thus a far-easier target for NHL justice. ... Under the current NHL rule of law, it isn't justice for all. It is justice for some."
It would be nice to have things treated fairly, at least," Simon told the Associated Press after the Wild practised on Friday. "I don't think in that instance it's fair at all. I couldn't believe right away that nothing was going to be done about it. I still can't believe it."
Simon should start believing it. Even with a suspension handed out, the NHL's two-tiered system of justice is still blatantly obvious. There's one code for superstars like Pronger and a different one for everyone else: consider Pronger's pair of one-game suspensions last playoffs for offenses that likely would have meant multiple games for anyone else. Campbell cited history as a factor in determining the length of the Simon decision, but Pronger's history is almost as bad: Simon has 8 suspensions in 15 years, while Pronger's racked up 7 in 14 (including three in the last calendar year). The relative lengths further demonstrate the special treatment Pronger gets. The longest suspension he'd ever received previously was four games, and his total suspensions including this one only total 20 regular season games and two post-season games. By contrast, Simon's two longest suspensions amounted to 25 and 30 games each, respectively.
The offenses aren't that dissimilar, either. ESPN has a great breakdown of the incidents involving Pronger, which include hitting Pat Peake in the throat with a stick, swinging a stick at Jeremy Roenick's helmet, cross-checking Brendan Morrow in the face and kicking Ville Nieminen. By contrast, Simon's suspensions are generally less physically harmful: his longest suspension prior to the March 2007 stick-swinging incident (similar to both of Pronger's stick incidents, but worth a 25-game suspension instead of a four-game ban) was three games for alleged racial remarks. Add the incidents up, and it's Pronger who looks like the bigger goon, but Simon with the harsher punishment.
The league's also giving Pronger the benefit of the doubt, as the Vancouver Province's Jason Botchford reports. "In attempting to free himself, Pronger carelessly and recklessly brought his foot down," Campbell said in a statement. As Botchford writes, "The other possibility is that Pronger wasn't careless at all, that he intended to injure in an act of frustration."
Campbell's release makes Pronger's actions sound like an accident, unlike his comments in Simon's case. "But he just snaps," he told the Canadian Press back then. "And we can't have that. Because now we're talking about the safety of other players on the ice. ... You would hope he wouldn't do it again but maybe he can't help himself. I don't know. He's never actually come out and said, 'I will never do this again.'"
Oh really, Mr. Campbell? Where's your concern for other players in the Pronger incident? This guy's done a lot to hurt players over the years: look at the concussion he gave Dean McCammond last playoffs. Playing with skates is a dangerous business: see Zednik, Richard, Perry, Corey, and Bieksa, Kevin, to name just a few. However, he's a star who sells jerseys and draws fans, so he gets the kid-gloves treatment while Campbell muses about ending Simon's career. That's not right, and it's not fair.
I have every bit of respect for Pronger's abilities as a player, but there can't be one standard for stars and one for role players. The Globe's Allan Maki summed that up nicely on the Globe on Hockey blog. "Simon deserved his suspension, no one’s quibbling about that," he wrote. "But letting Pronger go unpunished only raises more incriminating questions, such as: Is the NHL afraid of affecting Anaheim’s playoff push by suspending Pronger? Is the NHL afraid of invoking the wrath of Ducks’ general manager Brian Burke? Is the NHL hiding behind the old bit about not knowing what a player’s true intent is in such heat-of-the-moment moments? Based on what we’ve seen thus far, we certainly know what the NHL’s intent is: suspend the easy targets but let’s not be so hasty when it comes to our superstars."
Another intersting take is from New York Islanders' media relations VP, Chris Botta. Botta hits most of the points I've already elaborated on, but adds this about the initial Simon on Ruutu incident. "I'm going to step out just a bit here and share something that Chris said to me a few times," he wrote. "In all honesty, when he volunteered his thoughts I was torn between being sympathetic and concerned that Chris had lost his way. Basically, Chris felt that on judgment day he was treated differently than other players. I never let the conversation get to the subject of why." What's interesting here is what Botta doesn't say. Clearly, a PR guy wouldn't bring up anything this controversial (I'm impressed that he was so vocal about this in the first place), but one gets the impression Simon might have felt that race could have played a role (Simon is half Ojibwa): there have been suggestions that racism played a role in Islanders' coach Ted Nolan getting blacklisted from the NHL for years after winning the Jack Adams Trophy, and he certainly had to struggle with racist taunts while coaching junior hockey. I really hope that this isn't the case, that our society has moved beyond that, and that Colin Campbell treated Chris Simon the same way he would have treated a white role player (we already know it's not how he would have treated a superstar), but the shadow of possible racism still lingers.
In the league's defence, it wouldn't have been easy to suspend Pronger for 30 games, particularly with the playoffs looming: that would have taken the Ducks from favorites to repeat as Stanley Cup champions back down to the realms of the merely mortal contenders. They did it with Todd Bertuzzi, though, which certainly hurt the Canucks that year. That incident was different, and obviously more serious in terms of its consequences, but the precedent was set that the league didn't mind severely reducing a team's playoff chances via suspension if the situation warranted it. The Canucks of that year took the eventual Stanley Cup finalist Calgary Flames to seven games and overtime in the first round that year: who knows what they could have accomplished with Big Bert? Pronger should have gotten the same treatment as Simon, regardless of where the season was at.
Related:
- James Mirtle's take: interestingly, 77% of respondents to his poll (122 people) agree with me that the suspension was too short.
- Tom Benjamin's take
- Alanah's take
Update: As usual, the Globe's Eric Duhatschek nails this one: "Simon's act may have been slightly more egregious than Pronger's, but it's hard to understand why the sentence was almost four times as long – unless you're prepared to consider that Pronger is a former Hart Memorial Trophy winner and an important cog on the defending Stanley Cup champion Ducks, whereas Simon is a fringe player and thus a far-easier target for NHL justice. ... Under the current NHL rule of law, it isn't justice for all. It is justice for some."
Monday, December 17, 2007
The kids are all right
It came out today that Canucks’ centre Brendan Morrison will miss up to 12 weeks after undergoing wrist surgery. This is merely the latest injury misfortune to strike Vancouver, as they've spent plenty of time this year without three of their top defencemen (Sami Salo and Lukas Krajicek, who have returned to the lineup, and Kevin Bieksa, who's still out) and their number-one goaltender (Roberto Luongo, slated to return in tomorrow's game against the New Jersey Devils). Yet, despite the rash of injuries to top players, they've turned in quite a successful season so far: their 38 points are good enough that they're tied with the Minnesota Wild for first in the Northwest Division, and sit fifth overall in the Western Conference. A large part of their success so far has come from the stellar performances turned in by the younger players they've called up to patch the holes: Alex Edler and Luc Bourdon did a terrific job filling in on defence (see Ben Kuzma's column in The Province for further proof), while forward callups Mason Raymond and Jason Jaffray have also been solid so far. Combine this with Ryan Kesler having a breakout season (and living up to Bobby Clarke's offer sheet), Curtis Sanford showing that he's pretty darn good for a backup, and Alex Burrows having another strong year, and the future certainly looks bright for the Canucks. Depth has been a concern with this team in the past, but it shouldn't be as big of a worry this year, and there are still some great prospects down in Manitoba (Ryan Shannon, Rick Rypien, Michael Grabner, Brad Moran, and Jannik Hansen spring to mind). In the immortal words of The Who, the kids are all right.
A special Canuck edition of the links of the day:
-Zanstrom reports that Luongo will start tomorrow
-Ben Kuzma's Canucks Nation feature in The Province: his three stars of the week are Sanford, Edler, and Jaffray
-Tom Benjamin on why the Canucks' defensive brand of hockey is still entertaining
-A new Canucks' rap (like last year's ""Trapper's Delight"): Trap It Like It's Hot(thanks to Alanah for the link)
-Elliot Pap of the Vancouver Sun on Luongo's return
-Grant Kerr of the Globe previews tomorrow's Luongo-Brodeur showdown
-The guys over at Orland Kurtenblog on music they'd like to hear at GM Place
-The take over at the Canucks Hockey Blog on the Morrison situation, and if the Canucks should try to replace him now or later
A special Canuck edition of the links of the day:
-Zanstrom reports that Luongo will start tomorrow
-Ben Kuzma's Canucks Nation feature in The Province: his three stars of the week are Sanford, Edler, and Jaffray
-Tom Benjamin on why the Canucks' defensive brand of hockey is still entertaining
-A new Canucks' rap (like last year's ""Trapper's Delight"): Trap It Like It's Hot(thanks to Alanah for the link)
-Elliot Pap of the Vancouver Sun on Luongo's return
-Grant Kerr of the Globe previews tomorrow's Luongo-Brodeur showdown
-The guys over at Orland Kurtenblog on music they'd like to hear at GM Place
-The take over at the Canucks Hockey Blog on the Morrison situation, and if the Canucks should try to replace him now or later
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
