"You would make this trade last month, this month or next year." - Sharks GM Doug Wilson, after trading Brad Stuart, Marco Sturm, and Wayne Primeau for Joe Freaking Thornton

Doug Wilson, a humble man, understates things considerably. So do you pity Bruins fans, or figure they should have seen it coming? They're like the woman who won't leave no matter how much the old man smacks her around.

Or maybe tonight, they're more like Jackie Chiles: "This is the most public yet of my many humiliations."

Pierre Maguire is blustery by nature, but he was downright outraged on behalf of Bruins Fan tonight. And no wonder! Joe Thornton still has things to prove for sure. But he's a Top 5 NHL forward, and he got traded for two above-average yet utterly replaceable players. Mike O'Connell is insane, and/or very, very bad at his job.

And note to Sharks fans who are a little melancholy about seeing a couple of team pillars go: when the Flames made the trade in the post header, my initial reaction was, "oh...I liked Don Lever". This is good news for you.

Aw, crap. I just realized that means it's bad news for Flames fans.

Yesterday, I threw out a Darryl Sutter quote as an aside to the game preview: "There's only about seven or eight actual No. 1 centremen in the National Hockey League." We went on about it in the comments a bit, with Cosh saying, "when you follow the statement to its consequences it falls apart, like a lot of offhanded stuff coaches say."

Two points:

1. Cosh's generalization about the "offhanded stuff coaches say" is indisputably true
2. Darryl Sutter does not need another nod-and-repeat-er, or apologist, and I have no desire to be one

However, I think Sutter's statement is defensible from a certain angle. One definition of a #1 centre, and a decent one I think, is a guy who a coach is happy to throw out there in any key situation. Where the coach is thinking, "We need [something] here, I'm sure glad I can send [#1 centre] out, because I'm pretty sure I'm going to get it."

Based on the past 2-3 seasons (as opposed to the 1st 25 games of this season), my list would be: Forsberg, Lecavalier, Sundin, Modano, Sakic, Marleau, Brad Richards, and Joe Thornton.

That's my top tier. Now who isn't on this list of eight, that maybe should be?

The young guys. I doubt that Carolina would trade Staal for anybody on that list, correctly. But his body of work is pretty thin at the moment. Same with Crosby. Spezza? I still get the impression that when they're up a goal late, Murray would rather have Mike Fisher out there than Spezza. Also, I haven't gotten the sense that Spezza has that ability to "take over a game", although again, it's tough to stand out in that way when you consider who he's playing with. Maybe Andrew or McMurtry can disavow me of these notions, if false.

Furthermore, if you want to include these guys in that top tier, you have to take Sakic off (data point: look at Sakic's shifts, and Laperriere's, after the 3rd goal last night - who's the Avs' #1 centre right now?).

The too-far-past-their-prime guys. Mario isn't a chance-creating machine anymore, and is a major defensive liability. So's Pierre Turgeon (somewhat less so). Lindros doesn't dominate. Weight isn't the guy he used to be--he hasn't scored a point-per-game since he left Edmonton in 2001. I'd also put Roenick, Yzerman, Primeau, Nieuwendyk, and Fedorov in this category; they once belonged, but no more.

The flaky guys. Marc Savard has 37 points in 25 games, but he gets hurt all the time. And somehow, no matter how well he's playing at the moment, he's a constant threat to be a healthy scratch 10 games down the road. Nylander and Jokinen belong here too. If there's a chance you might be in the coach's doghouse next week, you're not a legit #1 centreman.

Yashin has probably played his way out of this category this year, and belongs at the top with the big boys, but his past playoff performances drag him back to here, in my eyes.

Also, I have to put Pavel Datsyuk here, or maybe more charitably in the "young guys" category. Is he the New Magic Man? Because it seems like whenever the Wings most need a big performance from him, he disappears (0 goals in 12 playoff games in 2004).

The not-quite-enough-pop guys. These are the guys who the coach probably is confident throwing out there in any situation, but who lack premium offensive skills, at least relative to the big boys. Craig Conroy. Brendan Morrison. Probably Horcoff. Maybe Briere.

The leftover guy. I hardly ever see Montreal games, and he's injured a lot, so I just have no earthly clue how good Saku Koivu is, or isn't.

----------
Again, Sutter's statement is basically non-disprovable. You can pick any number (X) and say that's how many #1 centres there are. You just pick your Top X centres, look at what they bring as a group that lesser players don't, and define that as what constitutes as #1 centre.

I have my own preferred definition. It seems like the NHL has changed in the past 20 years such that a highly gifted player is more likely to be a winger and less likely to be a centre (why this is is a subject for another day). On most teams, the top offensive player is a winger, and the #1 line is whichever line that guy's on. So the mission of most teams' #1 centre is to allow that star winger to be as good as he can be. If he's successful at that, then he is a bona fide number-one NHL centre to my mind.

That's why a guy like Craig Conroy deserves credit as a #1 centre. In the previous three seasons, his right winger won the Rocket Richard Trophy twice. This year, Pavol Demitra is having a career year on his right side, and so is Frolov on his left. Coincidence? Bah.

Peter Forsberg, Vincent Lecavalier, Mats Sundin, Mike Modano, Patrick Marleau, Brad Richards, Joe Thornton, Craig Conroy, Brendan Morrison, Shawn Horcoff, Eric Staal, Jason Spezza, and Sidney Crosby. That's my list of the 13 genuine #1 centres in the NHL on November 30, 2005. Insults are encouraged.

A local youth group reacts to the result of tonight's Flames-Predators game [and the Oilers-Avs game - sacamano].

It sounds like both Alberta teams outplayed the opposition but didn't get the results. !thhpppttt! indeed.

Looks like my support for Steve Yzerman's Olympic candidacy yesterday has been proved wrong and/or made moot by recent events. In short, I didn't know how bad his knee still was. Today Bob McKenzie is wondering if Stevie Y might just retire--like, right now.

I watched the Nov. 16 Wings-Flames game (without sound), and parts of the Nov. 17 Wings-Oilers game, and thought he looked pretty much like the Yzerman of the past 5 years. I didn't realize he was only playing about 12 minutes a game.

His ice time in the past 3 games: 6:17, 6:37, 9:28. Whether that's all his knee allows him to play, or the knee has harmed his play enough that that's all the time he deserves, it hardly matters. At that rate, I would expect him to retire shortly. If not, he will certainly beg off the Olympics for the rest.

Too bad, Steve - Canada can always use a guy like you.

Exclusive report: must credit Battle of Alberta

While most of the city is bundled up to enjoy the Grey Cup victory parade, it's not all ham and plaques in Edmonton. A source close to the Oilers has forwarded me this transcript of a very tense exchange from the Oil's team meal after their morning skate:

Morrison: Hey! What the hell is this, Laraque?
Laraque: It's a bol of shau-dere, Michel.
Morrison: Wait a minute, come here. What did you call it? Say it loud enough so everyone can hear. Come on, say it...
Laraque: Ahem. Shau-dere.
Morrison: [raucous laughter] Shau-dere? Shau-dere? It's "chow-dah". Say it right!
Laraque: [pause] Shaudear.
Morrison: [laughter] Come back here! I'm not through demeaning you.
Laraque: I send you back to Greenville dans une boite, p'tit merde...

Morrison's condition is not presently known, although he is still tapped as the Oilers' starting goalie tonight.

Related info here: the header gave me a good five-minute laugh. And if none of this makes any sense, clearly you haven't heard a Mike Morrison interview.

The Flames head into Nashville tonight for the first of a 5-game roadie. By his own account (he comes on Calgary radio fairly often), former Flames coach and multiple Cup-winner Terry Crisp is loving life as the colour guy on Predators TV broadcasts.

I'm having trouble figuring Nashville out. Are they good? Well, they have 31 points in 21 games; they have a top-10 NHL goalie; and they were full value for their 8th-place finish last year. Are they mediocre? Well, they've only scored 6 more goals than they've allowed (63/57); their team net plus/minus is -4; and their marquee offseason addition has less than 1 PPG (20 in 21 games, 12 of which are on the PP) and is a team-worst -8.

They have 3 wins over St. Louis, and haven't yet faced Detroit, Vancouver, or Calgary. Colour me unimpressed, I guess. They're probably a playoff team, though: the number of intradivisional games on the schedule just about guarantees that two teams from every division will finish Top-8 in the conference, and the Hawks little run of late hasn't convinced me that they'll be the #2 in the Central.

As for the Flames, even with that little bump in the road on Friday night, they're still on an excellent roll. They have one regulation loss in their past 13 games (10-1-2), and a win tonight will give them sole possession of 1st in the Northwest.

Their attack in the shootout loss Friday, both even-strength and on the PP, left a lot to be desired. They won't be successful going forward if they create so few scoring chances. And yet, sometimes a team gets held to one, or zero, goals. It happens to all teams, and except for the rare 50-save masterpiece by the opposing goalie, you never come away from one of those games thinking the offense looked good. It'll be better tonight. But they could sure use Lombardi...

Speaking of which, here's the tough-love quote of the day from Darryl Sutter (my emphasis):

As for who'll be Calgary's top centre in the near future, nothing is set in stone.
[...]
Sutter admits he doesn't know the answer yet, especially with Matthew Lombardi still on the shelf with an ankle injury.

"Daymond's a proven 20-goal, 30-assist guy, so that's what we expect of him ... When Rhino's on, he's really good and when he's not, you can't use him."

Ooof. Bonus Sutter quote: "There's only about seven or eight actual No. 1 centremen in the National Hockey League." This statement is a lot more plausible when you look at the list of #1 centres (statistically), c/w numbers, at the bottom of the article.

Puck drops at 6PM MST, PPV and FAN960. Go Flames.

A few teams have now played 26 games, but the Senators only played their 20th on Friday afternoon. Below, I have posted the Standings based on the points and goal differential of every team through their 20th game. I don't really have much to say about them now (except for "Damn! The Senators are playing well!"), but I anticipate doing it again for each of the next three quarters of the season, and there may be some interesting comparisons.

Peter Maher, the only radio play-by-play voice the Flames have ever had, says that the second quarter of the season is where you find out who's for real and who's not. That is, if a team is playing over their heads, or way below their abilities, then they'll either revert to form in the 2nd quarter, or not at all. This sounds suspiciously like a hunch that's unsupportable by the numbers; I hope to find out one way or another.

Eastern Conference Standings thru 20 games

Points:

1. OTT 34
2. CAR 29
3. PHI 27
4. MTL 29
5. NYR 25
6. TOR 24
7. BUF 22
8. NYI 20
9. NJD 20
10. TBL 19
11. BOS 19
12. PIT 18
13. ATL 17
14. WSH 16
15. FLA 16

Goal Differential:

1. OTT 53
2. NYR 18
3. PHI 14
4. CAR 14
5. MTL 5
6. TOR 3
7. BUF -1
8. TBL -2
9. ATL -4
10. NYI -7
11. BOS -8
12. NJD -11
13. FLA -15
14. PIT -23
15. WSH -28

Western Conference Standings thru 20 games

Points:

1. DET 31
2. LAK 27
3. VAN 26
4. NSH 31
5. DAL 27
6. COL 24
7. CGY 24
8. EDM 21
9. PHX 20
10. MIN 20
11. SJS 20
12. CHI 18
13. ANA 18
14. STL 11
15. CBJ 10

Goal differential:

1. DET 28
2. LAK 18
3. COL 14
4. DAL 11
5. VAN 8
6. NSH 8
7. MIN 7
8. PHX 2
9. EDM 1
10. CGY -1
11. ANA -5
12. SJS -14
13. CHI -15
14. STL -28
15. CBJ -33

Note: don't try to use these numbers to calculate much else for the league as a whole, as it's not a "closed system" -- some teams played their 20th game vs. an opponent playing their 21st, etc. For example, the goal differentials don't add up to zero

I was listening to Live From Wayne Gretzky's Saturday afternoon, and heard the 10th iteration of a discussion that's been going on for months on talk radio: should Mario Lemieux and Steve Yzerman be on the Canadian Olympic hockey team? Here's the gist of the "problem", from Bob McKenzie:

Slice it however you like, the first 12 forward positions appear to be spoken for and we haven't even mentioned Mario Lemieux or Steve Yzerman, who because of their stature in this game, especially with Gretzky, get to call their own shot. They're on the team unless they say otherwise.

If Lemieux and Yzerman do speak up and bow out gracefully, perhaps one of Staal, Spezza or Crosby gets the call.

So the idea is this (and again, I've heard this from a dozen hockey pundits): they deserve to be on the team, and they don't deserve to be on the team. Apparently no one has the balls to just say, "I disagree with Wayne Gretzky--these two guys are no longer worthy of being on the team, regardless of what they want themselves." Why not? Why is everyone engaging in this surreal meta-commentary, instead of analysing what they think would be best for the team, then stating an opinion?

The thing that really gets me is this underlying wish that Stevie and Mario will "bow out gracefully". Here's the Yzerman half of the angle:

It is Lemieux and Detroit's Steve Yzerman who are most often mentioned as players who have been surpassed by Canada's young talent. But Gretzky has publicly promised both players spots on Team Canada.

Unlike Lemieux, Yzerman last week did not sound as if he was prepared to let Gretzky and the rest of Team Canada's brain trust off the hook by withdrawing.

"They're picking the team," said Yzerman, who has two goals and four assists in 14 games. "If my play between now and then merits a spot, I'll be there. If it doesn't, I won't."

Now pardon me, but that does sound like Yzerman is "letting them off the hook". How much more grace do you want? He's asking to be chosen, or not, on merit, with no references to any promises, or career contributions, or anything else. The disagreement, or controversy, here is simply this: McKenzie and friends don't think Yzerman can contribute as well as 13 other forwards, whereas Yzerman thinks he can. And as it happens, I agree with Yzerman.

Try thinking of it this way: what did Yzerman bring to the table in 2002 that he can't bring now? Very little, in my mind. He's still an excellent defensive forward who's won 3 Stanley Cups. He'll play whatever role Quinn wants him to. He's not as good offensively as he was 15 years ago, but he can still be dangerous skating in the direction of the opposing team's goal, and unlike some other checking centres, he can sure as hell bang a puck into an open net.

Steve Yzerman would not be a liability to the Canadian Olympic team in any way. (In contrast to (obviously) Mario, Spezza, or even Crosby, who hasn't proved himself (yet) to be very rigourous in the defensive end).

For all of Mario's good points, and past contributions, I don't think he would be a good selection. However, Gretzky has said that it's up to him, and so it shall be. Here's what I hope happens, and I think I'll use it as a prediction, too:

Lemieux bows out with the understanding that Crosby will be selected in "his place". Yzerman is selected to the team, amid some controversy (I'd guess Spezza is a definite No, and Staal is probably left looking in as well). Then Canada wins the gold, Yzerman plays well, and we wonder what all the fuss was about.

Note: Update-slash-reversal here.

Forbes.com calculates the most underpriced and overpriced players in the game.

I promised on Friday that I'd stop talking about (surprise!) the most overpriced player. The biggest surprise to me on the underpriced side is that there's someone who's a better deal than Sidney Crosby at $850k. That assessment will be shortlived, I suspect.

The oldest trophy in North American sports is up for grabs tomorrow.

I guess this really doesn't belong on the BofA blog since, well, Calgary didn't really get their horse out of the gate. Nevertheless, since the Eskies are there -- again -- it seemed necessary to mention it.

I attended the 2002 Grey Cup in Regina, and I am convinced that it is the most fun you can have with your pants on. I'm not sure I've ever had a better weekend. In an effort to recreate that magic, I'm starting on the Grey Cup Party circuit today, and so I likely will not be around a computer for the next few days.

For some fantastic CFL commentary check out the excellent CanadianRules. A great looking site with some equally terrific content. Rumour has it that they are evey liveblogging the big game.

I loved that overtime. They drop the puck with about 3 minutes left, and Millions tells us it's Peca, Dvorak, Staios & Ulanov against Iginla, Reinprecht, Phaneuf & Hamrik. I'm thinking, "Woo-hoo!" Then, the Oilers keep the Flames stuck in their own end for about 25 seconds or so; quite a while, but not long enough that anyone went to the bench when the play went the other direction.

Then the Flames had the puck in Edmonton's end for, what, a minute and a half? Millions was yapping about how long Iginla had been out there, even though he didn't look that tired, while Peca and Ulanov were still out there too, and bloody well did. The whole shift went from something like 3:00 left to 1:00 left. And when there was a whistle with 40 seconds left, guess who was back out there? Look at that shift chart.

Pisani made a nice move for the shootout goal. When Phaneuf got announced as the third shooter, I was concerned.

Rare Sutter criticism alert: I think we're all clear 20-ish games into the season that shooting is preferable to deking in the shootout (ice conditions, etc.). We also understand that putting your best guy 3rd doesn't make sense, because he might not even get a chance.

But putting Phaneuf in the top 3, or most especially 3rd, just tells Mike Morrison that you plan on beating him by shooting. It could have worked out, I guess; it didn't.

Going forward, the key to winning shootouts will be forcing the opposing goalie to play it honestly. Yeah, Iginla shoots on most if not all breakaways, but if the goalie comes out too far, Jarome will turn his ass upside down. As fast as the "bad ice, gotta shoot" wisdom has appeared, it will disappear, because NHL goalies simply are too good when they know what's coming.

Maybe more tomorrow; I guess there was 60 minutes of regulation that I haven't mentioned. As always, check Covered In Oil for funny and fair recaps.

And I see the election campaign is already underway in Edmonton:



I am now officially bored/done with hacking on Mike Peca.

UPDATE: I spoke too soon about "last one"; the contributions of site readers must be passed on. From peter:

And jhuck has some choice Bible smack:

I will kindle a fire in thee, and it shall devour every green tree in thee, and every dry tree; the flaming flame shall not be quenched, and all faces from the south to the north shall be burned therein. - Ezekiel 20:47

and

A fire devoureth before them; and behind them a flame burneth; the land is as the garden of Eden before them, and behind them a desolate wilderness; yea and nothing shall escape them. The appearance of them is as the appearance of horses; and as horsemen, so shall they run. Like the noise of chariots on the tops of mountains shall they leap, like the noise of a flame of fire that devoureth the stubble, as a strong people set in battle array. - Joel 2: 3-5

Yes!

2005/10/20: EDM 1 @ CGY 3
2005/10/15: EDM 0 @ CGY 3
2004/03/09: EDM 1 @ CGY 1
2003/12/28: CGY 2 @ EDM 1
2003/12/23: EDM 1 @ CGY 2
2003/11/15: CGY 1 @ EDM 2 (OT)
2003/10/25: CGY 4 @ EDM 2
2003/10/14: EDM 0 @ CGY 1
2003/04/05: CGY 4 @ EDM 1
2003/03/11: EDM 5 @ CGY 2 (Ta-da!)
2003/02/07: CGY 4 @ EDM 3
2003/01/20: EDM 3 @ CGY 4

Wow. In the last twelve games between Calgary and Edmonton, we have nine Flames regulation wins, one Oilers regulation win, one Oilers overtime win, and one tie.

Remember this movie? I barely do either, but it was #1 at the box office the last time Edmonton beat Calgary in regulation. Heady days.

The bad news for the Flames tonight is that Dvorak is going to be super-motivated, having been released from Peca's line (now he has two linemates to help him create scoring chances, instead of just one). Just look at what happened with Hemsky when they untied that anchor from him.

In all seriousness, the demotion of Peca to the 4th line speaks well of Craig Mactavish. It shows that he's not worried about what money Peca makes, just what he can do on the ice, even though it might be embarrassing to Kevin Lowe, which by the way, it should be.

But back to the Flames: they're the hottest team in the NHL right now. Tonight is the last game of a stretch where they play 10 of 12 at home. They've won both of their road games, and 8 of their 9 home games (all in regulation time). They're 8-2 in the Northwest Division.

And possibly best of all, they've done it without the guy who probably figures to be their #1 centreman: Matthew Lombardi remains out with a high ankle sprain. In 20-odd games, it has become received wisdom in Calgary that Daymond Langkow is not a "#1 centre" (as you may recall from the preseason, I agree). Right now Reinprecht is centering Iginla (and Kobasew), but when Lombardi gets back to full speed, he's more intense and better offensively than Rhino.

If you need a reminder of what M.L. can do, check the highlights from the Dallas home opener. Iginla is the only other guy on the team who could make those two passes for primary assists.

The previous Coach Sutter used to say that the most important game on a roadtrip was the last home game before you took off. I doubt this bears out statistically, but I expect a strong performance tonight before the Flames head out for five on the road.

Eventually, the Oil is going to win one of these games, but I don't see much reason why it should be tonight. I think Calgary wins 4-3, and we finally see some fireworks and pissed-off players. Go Flames.

The Battle of Alberta has been nominated for Best Sports Blog - you can go here to vote. If it's not going to be for us, Golbez, Mirtle, and Canucks OpEd are all in the running, and are all good hockey blogs that I read regularly.

And if you are going to head over there, please take the time to add your votes for ColbyCosh.com in the Best Blog and Best Media Blog category, and also for Tart Cider (LCBO Privatization) in the Best Blog Post Series. These guys are both good friends of this blog, and probably have the two best sites on the web.

It looks like the RPM line is going to be reunited for the big BoA tonight. I love that line.

Oh, ya, it also means our 4th line centre will be making lots and lots of money.

This afternoon on Long Island, the Ottawa Senators will be the last NHL team to play their 20th game of the season. Now that we're fully one-quarter into the season, I think it's time for the NHL to paint over those bloody "Thank You Fans" inside both blue lines at every rink.

The lockout is history. Still seeing that message 20 games in reminds me of Bill Dauterive dressing up as Santa well into February. (I also have a fond memory of some radio talker on January 1, 1990: "Well folks, it's the 90s now, a new decade, so you know what that means: time to take those 'I Drove The Coquihalla' bumper stickers off your cars.")

Make sure to email us if you have a good one.

I was going to wait and just spring some stuff on Matt tomorrow, but the potential in this is so great that it requires the collective wisdom of hockey fans everywhere. Thanks to Grabia at Sports Matters for pointing me to this site, where you too can make your own church signs*.

Here are some more early attempts, but I'm sure you all can do much better.

Season Record: 13-10-1	Season Record: 14-8-2

Enough fooling around. It's time to take the gloves off. Tomorrow's Battle of Alberta is clearly more than just another regular season game.

Since (1) there have been far too few insults on this board, (2) I'm not witty enough to come up with anything original today, and (3) I'm a sucker for terrible jokes, here are a couple. Please add more.

Q: How do you find Calgary?
A: Walk south until you smell it and then west until you step in it.

Q: What do the Flames and the Titanic have in common?
A: They both look terrific until they hit the ice.

Q: What do the Calgary Stampeders and the Calgary Flames have in common?
A: Neither team can play hockey . . . or football.

Q: Why can't Pamela Anderson support the Flames?
A: The Flames' one cup can't support her.

Mike Morrison has now been with the club for 30 days, meaning that if he gets sent back to the minors he has to clear waivers. My guess is that, sadly, he's as good as gone when this happens.

I just can't see K-Lowe or Mac-T shipping off their preseason #1 goaltender to keep Morrison.

Can we keep Conks on IR or "conditioning stints" for the rest of the season? Can Mo pull a groin when Conks gets healthy?

Horc was wired up for last night's game giving us this terrific exchange (at the 2:50 minute mark of highlights clip).

Hemsky tells Horc how to win a faceoff, and it gets him a goal. Fantastic.

Looks like my wish came true: both the Flames and the Oil are on a little roll (one of us has even won 10 of the past 11 games!). I don't think there's going to be any excuses for Friday's head-to-head matchup, not that it would matter much anyway.

- Hey, excellent pass by Peca on the Oilers', ERRRRR, Wild's 3rd goal tonight. (I'm kidding, of course: when a guy does that much for you on the offensive end, you have to forgive the odd turnover in your own end that leads directly to a goal...).

I have my 3rd consecutive day of work away from the computer tomorrow (or as Matt's wife calls it, "actual work"), but on Friday I should be smacking up a storm all day. Have I mentioned that the Oilers suck lately? They do, you know... (plus, I have a friend who went to primary school with Raffi Torres, and apparently he always cheated at dodgeball**. Not cool, Raffi!!)

**Story not true

The Flames are gonna have their way, to-night... they play the Sharks in about half an hour at the "Pengrowth Saddledome", a name that Cosh has previously suggested sounds like an internet manhood enhancement scheme.

What can I say? The standings aren't ordered by coolness of rink name. (Or, fortunately for both the Flames and Oilers, consistency of rink name--although at least the Flames haven't changed their mind about what their building is every time they get a new sponsor. It's a coliseum! No, it's a centre! No, it's a place! My guess for next name for the Oilers' home is the "Schlumberger lksjdf..."

Puck drop at 7, radio only for the first time in a while. Go Flames.

Inspired by this post by Cosh, I've been following the league in terms of Goal Differential as well as the other usual measures of success.

It shows, similiar to Benjamin's observation yesterday, that the East and West are playing different games.

Only five teams in the East have a postitive defensive goal differential - and one of them is in last place!

In the West, on the other hand, only five teams don't have a positive defensive goal differential - including, alas, Edmonton.

The offensive goal differential numbers are similar only the other way around.

One thing that really sticks out, though, is that Calgary is one of only two teams in a playoff spot with a negative total goal differential. In fact, there are 6 Western teams below Calgary with a positive goal differential.

There are, of course, lots of other interesting things you can identify. Like, for example, the fact that Pittsburgh actually has a positive offensive GD. If they ever got a goaltender/defence they might actually be a good team. Nashville and Minnie, in contrast, have the best DGD in the West but are simply atrocious at scoring goals. Ottawa, for all the talk of their goal scoring, is actually doing better on the defensive end of the ice than the offensive end. Doug MacLean is the luckiest GM alive, because he still has his job despite the fact that his team can't do anything well. Etc.

I don't know how well this table will render on other computers - my html skills are limited at best, and it is just a cut 'n' paste from a larger hotlinked excel table on my desktop.

							Eastern Conference
%/PA	W%	Goal Diff.	GD Off.	GD Def.	GF/ Game	GA/ Game	RK
0.842	0.842	49	22.87	26.13	4.74	2.16	1	OTTAWA*
0.646	0.583	17	9.87	7.13	3.21	2.50	2	NY RANGERS*
0.690	0.667	12	7.87	4.13	3.57	3.00	3	CAROLINA*
0.705	0.636	2	0.87	1.13	3.09	3.00	4	MONTREAL
0.675	0.600	14	17.87	-3.87	4.25	3.55	5	PHILADELPHIA
0.619	0.571	7	10.87	-3.87	3.71	3.38	6	TORONTO
0.543	0.478	4	4.87	-0.87	3.13	2.96	7	TAMPA BAY
0.548	0.524	-2	2.87	-4.87	3.33	3.43	8	BUFFALO
#DIV/0!	#DIV/0!	0	-67.13	67.13	#DIV/0!	#DIV/0!
0.524	0.524	-5	-0.13	-4.87	3.19	3.43	9	NY ISLANDERS
0.500	0.450	-11	-6.13	-4.87	3.05	3.60	10	NEW JERSEY
0.455	0.318	-25	0.87	-25.87	3.09	4.23	11	PITTSBURGH
0.432	0.318	-10	1.87	-11.87	3.14	3.59	12	BOSTON
0.429	0.381	-5	5.87	-10.87	3.48	3.71	13	ATLANTA
0.381	0.381	-29	-6.13	-22.87	2.90	4.29	14	WASHINGTON
0.381	0.286	-17	-20.13	3.13	2.24	3.05	15	FLORIDA
							Western Conference
%/PA	W%	Goal Diff.	GD Off.	GD Def.	GF/ Game	GA/ Game	RK
0.727	0.682	26	12.87	13.13	3.64	2.45	1	DETROIT*
0.705	0.682	22	17.87	4.13	3.86	2.86	2	LOS ANGELES*
0.682	0.636	11	5.87	5.13	3.32	2.82	3	VANCOUVER*
0.609	0.565	-1	-8.13	7.13	2.57	2.61	4	CALGARY
0.750	0.667	5	-13.13	18.13	3.00	2.72	5	NASHVILLE
0.675	0.650	11	4.87	6.13	3.60	3.05	6	DALLAS
0.595	0.524	13	13.87	-0.87	3.86	3.24	7	COLORADO
0.543	0.522	2	3.87	-1.87	3.09	3.00	8	EDMONTON
#DIV/0!	#DIV/0!	0	-67.13	67.13	#DIV/0!	#DIV/0!
0.500	0.458	4	-2.13	6.13	2.71	2.54	9	PHOENIX
0.500	0.450	7	-13.13	20.13	2.70	2.35	10	MINNESOTA
0.500	0.400	-14	-15.13	1.13	2.60	3.30	11	SAN JOSE
0.455	0.364	-5	-10.13	5.13	2.59	2.82	12	ANAHEIM
0.429	0.429	-17	-7.13	-9.87	2.86	3.67	13	CHICAGO
0.275	0.200	-28	-15.13	-12.87	2.60	4.00	14	ST LOUIS
0.238	0.238	-37	-29.13	-7.87	1.81	3.57	15	COLUMBUS

Pleasure Motors is on a roll:

Mike Peca quite literally can't put the puck into an empty net. I'm not sure if you saw highlights, but fook, he could have been shooting on a midget guarding the end boards and he would have found a way to miss last night.

Is it ironic, inappropriate, or neither that my favourite hockey weblog is one devoted to the Edmonton Oilers? There's several I like a lot, but I just don't think you can beat Chris!, mike w, and Pleasure Motors.

In case it is inappropriate, I won't use any more superlatives. But it's hard not to like them when they keep agreeing with me...

Pretty slow game last night.

Morrison looked solid, which is nice. Sure he looks a bit awkward, but he certainly seems to have better rebound control than Jussi. After the game MacT indicated that he would be very willing to start him back to back, so we might see him in Minnie.

I wish they kept shootout statistics (anyone?). Unless I'm mistaken, Smyth is 100% going all the way back to preseason including both overtime shootouts and regular old penalty shots. Plus he is still in the league's top 3 in shooting percentage.

The Flames take on the Avalanche in Denver tonight; if they win, they'll have a winning record against all four other Northwest Division teams (2-1 v. MIN, 2-1 v. COL, 2-0 v. VAN, 2-0 v. Nostalgiaville).

Radio says Shean Donovan is a healthy scratch tonight, along with Wiemer (and Montador). This means Macdonald, Ritchie, and Simon are all in.

And since the Hardy Astrom whammy worked so well last time, I'm going with it again. Puck drop at 7 (Flames PPV, FSRM). Go Flames.

The bl*g appears to be a medium made for Darryl Reaugh. On inexperienced officials learning as they go:

It's the Seven Dwarfs School of refereeing. They whistle while they work.

Not hockey related, but I still laughed:

I bought a Dyson vacuum. At $440 this thing had better suck.

On his visit to Disneyland:

Snow White could stand to lose a couple pounds...I think Cinderella hit on me. (very uncomfortable)...I think Disney is missing a real opportunity by having very little in the way of merchandising available for sale...I found the Fairy Godmother to be a little bitchy...

And on a marginally more serious and hockey-related note, check out What Worries Me (really).

Just me, or is it pretty incredible that the three main young players now considered to be on the bubble for selection to the Canadian Olympic hockey team are Crosby, Staal, & Nash?

Do you think headline writers are pressuring their papers' columnists to make this happen? Would Eric Staal add an S to his last name to make the puns slightly less tortured?

And if Quinn put them all on one line, what would we call it? The Woodstock line? Canadian Dream?

Reader submissions are urgently requested. All aboard the train!

During my hiatus, I went to a bookstore and was flipping through the hockey section. There is a nice little book called, "Shooting from the Lip: hockey's best quotes and quips."

Naturally, I perused it for the better part of an hour while sipping on my overpriced coffee. All the usual suspects are in there: Roenick, Hull, Chelios, etc.

But the best part was a two-page spread that looked something like this:

"When I look at the net I don't see a goalie" Pavel Bure	"When I look at the net I see 3 or 4 goalies"- Radek Dvorak

It explains so much.

Season Record: 11-10-1	Season Record: 8-8-3

Ok, I really am back now.

Some random thoughts.

• Eskies win, Eskies win, Eskies win!
  
  
• I don't think I should attend games in person anymore. Another chunk from my paycheque, another loss. Having said that, I don't think the Oil played that badly. Chicago is not as crummy as their record would suggest, and they are actually a pretty fun team to watch - despite all their thuggery.
  
  
• Why did we trade Semenov for a box of jockstraps? Does anyone have a good answer for this? Just when he was starting to play well, too. We don't save any salary, and we get nothing in return.
  
  
• LGG had a pretty nice game vs Chicago. I hope he keeps it up.
  
  
• Do we want Sykora? Apparently Burke wants minor league talent. We have lots of that - some of it is even playing in the minor leagues.
  
  
• Prediction: 3-2 Oilers
  

Far be it from me to speak on behalf of today's Oilers fans, but why has the organization elected to make a big pre-game ceremony out of replacing all their championship banners? Maybe I have an overly short memory, but it seems like every time the Oil celebrates their past, the present suffers in a big way.

- On October 18th, Paul Coffey's number was retired with the Oilers on a three-game losing streak. They lost that game in OT, then lost three more before turning it around.

- November 22, 2003: the Oilers were chugging along at 10-7-2 before the Heritage Classic in Commonwealth Stadium. They lost that game (attendance: 57,167), and won 3 games in the rest of 2003 (17 games played). Despite incredible success after the All-Star break, they weren't able to climb out of that hole.

The irony that the banners are being replaced due to old age is apparently lost on Kevin Lowe, but I have to think that even Coach Mac is starting to dread these trips down memory lane. And Cosh can't be the only fan who is "finally fed up with Heritage Classics and living in the past..."

Someone named Gary Poignant writes in the Edmonton Sun today that raising 22 banners is a bit much: "Do us all a favour, Oilers brass, and give Stanley some space up there."

I think that until they get over this compulsion to look wistfully backwards, they're unlikely to need it.

MORE: I don't mean for it to sound like I think those previous two remembrances were a bad idea; they weren't. The Heritage Classic was by all accounts a wild success, and provided fans with actual entertainment and memories. The team's slump afterwards probably couldn't have been foreseen. Likewise, Paul Coffey earned his tribute, and I'm sure the fans at the game enjoyed it.

But tonight's proposed "ceremony" baffles me. Who is the ad wizard in the Oiler organization who thought, "You know what we need? A big to-do to remind our fans, and players, that we haven't won anything in 15 years! It's been a whole month since we acknowledged the greatness of the '80s Oilers!"

If the team has to stand on the bench for so much as a minute to witness this exercise in laundry maintenance, I think it's a terrible idea. Naturally, I hope things turn out as well as they did the last couple of times.

An all-too-irregular feature here at the Battle of Alberta is our check-in at the TSN Message boards, to take the pulse of the hockey nation. And as you may recall, half the joke is in relaying only the first few words, and assuming it captures the spirit of the thing.

So! Here's some of the first ten takes on today's Vancouver-Anaheim game, where I gather the refs were having a very, very bad day:

• sdre79: "This was the worst officiating I have ever seen in ..."
• braandead: "Pathetic game to watch! I'm all for getting rid o ..."
• Shick_S: "The officiating in this game was atrocious. I cann ..."
• hockeystatic: "That could very well be the WORST officiated game ..."
• bobopot: "Boring. I thought I've seen horrible games so f ..."
• delsolaaron69: "Horrible Officiating!!! I have enjoyed watching th ..."

I didn't see the game, and it should be remembered that, no matter what the rules are, some game has got to be the most poorly officiated of the year. But that ain't good.

Hey, full credit to the Blackhawks for their two fairly convincing wins in Alberta. But I don't think I'm being snippy to say that, if they expect to be a playoff team, they have to stop cheating so damn much.

I thought the reffing as a whole tonight was probably the worst I've seen all year, but the facts remain:

• they took 11 penalties tonight, including a major
• they took 8 penalties last night, against Calgary's one
• they're the most penalized team in the league

The three most penalized teams in the league for the past 3 seasons are:

• '03/'04: Atlanta, Rangers, Toronto
• '02/'03: St. Louis, Columbus, Phoenix
• '01/'02: Florida, Rangers, Calgary

The thing that 7 of these 9 teams have in common is their non-playoffness. Full marks to Chicago for their PK--seriously, it's terrific--but this can't continue.

Also, an FYI for those of you like Sacamano who attended in person: the TV highlight of the game was shortly after the video review gave Stoll the goal to make it 4-2. Trent Yawney was being captured in full closeup (no sound) on HNIC, and (of course) chose that exact moment to yell, "What the F**k is going on!"

In Greg Millen's finest moment of the year, he didn't skip a beat, and chimed in with, "Well I'll tell you what's going on, Coach, the puck went over the red line, ..."

Time for both teams to win a couple of games. I think Friday's BofA Pt.3 will be more fun if the Flames and Oil are both on a roll.

So I guess this NHLPA thing isn't going away anytime soon. Steve Larmer quitting without leaving a note would probably get the fenceposts out of a few players' butts; the letter he wrote figures to influence entire dressing rooms.

"I agree with everything Steve Larmer says." That was Adrian Aucoin, Chicago player rep, between games on Hockey Night In Canada. No hemming or hawing--he practically stared at the camera lens. Anyone still think this is going away quietly?

The segment following that one was a semi-surreal satellite conversation between Ron Maclean (sitting next to Don Cherry) and Greg Millen (sitting next to Jim Hughson).

I'll do Millen a favour and assume that he himself doesn't have any particular agenda. (This might be excessively kind, because it means I have to assume that Millen mentioned Larmer had been "hunting for the past week" as meaningless small talk; it sure wasn't to bolster Larmer's credibility).

Anyway, Millen was insisting that this was entirely a process thing: Larmer's a good guy with "no agenda", he just wants things done right, and as such, he doesn't have any particular problem with Ted Saskin being the head of the NHLPA.

Again, I'll assume that Greg Millen thought he was sticking up for an old teammate against accusations of a personal vendetta, because otherwise, this makes no damn sense whatsover.

Read the letter! Sorry, but Steve Larmer didn't bring up Alan Eagleson--three times, including in the 1st paragraph--because he thinks Ted Saskin is the right guy once all this "procedural stuff" is cleared up. Jeez:

Ted is relying on the players playing the game and not paying attention to a most important matter that could affect many players for many years going forward.

We are a tattered union to say the least and it will take along time for the players to trust those that are left to run the PA.

Sorry Millen, but those aren't the words of a guy who's neutral on the matter. In fact, I can sum up Larmer's ten-paragraph corker in one sentence:

"I'm quitting because I don't think my boss is doing his job, or intends to."

I have no doubt that the remaining supporters of Saskin, whether it's 10%, 50%, or 90% of the NHLPA, would be happy to have the non-supporters painted as bitter with private vendettas, but it just doesn't stand up. There has to be room for a segment who doesn't support Saskin for the job on merit, whether that be his work during the lockout, or his actions since.

Anyway, what does this mean for us lowly fans? Probably nothing, at least for now. However, the possibility of the nuclear option, union decertification, is somewhat less remote today than it was yesterday.

A few months ago, TB had this to say, and it's stayed with me:

It's easy to see why the owners want a house union, but the players?

Again, decertification is still a remote possibility, but you can't tell me there's no agents and players thinking this same way. Stay tuned.

"It's great for the fans," Stoll said. "This is back like it was in the 80s."

If you were on any other team, Stoll, that might not raise any eyebrows.

I've been given strict orders to stay away from computers for the next few days.

So, regular Oiler rantings will resume on Monday.

The good news is that I actually get to see the Oil in person tonight. let's hope it is better than the last time.

Thanks again to Matt for holding down the fort

Postgame, win #8 v. Detroit:

Flames go for #9 on Friday v. Chicago. I have a karma-destroying post in mind already; plus, I hear that Mark Bell can be dangerous.

Ehhhh, what can I say. I knew the risks.

The one actual conclusion I drew from tonight's game: Trent Yawney, I detested you as a player, but you look like you might make a decent coach. Best of luck. -MF

You really can't draw up a more favourable scenario for gaining a 9th straight win than the one in place tonight. They're at home. Their opponent, the Chicago Blackhawks, has 4 regulation wins all season, only one of which was on the road, and that was in St. Louis (they also have two OT road wins: extra time v. Patrick Lalime, and shootout v. Petr Budaj). Eric Daze has been out all season, and Tuomo Ruutu is out now.

If you're looking to be contrary, what is there? I guess, like any other goalie in the NHL, the Bulin Wall could play out of his head and win the game on his own. There's also this, from the game preview:

LAST MEETING: Jan. 30, 2004; Blackhawks, 5-3. At Calgary, Alberta, Tuomo Ruutu scored twice as the Blackhawks rallied from a two-goal deficit and halted a franchise-record 19-game road losing streak.

The Flames could lose tonight, but I think the far more likely scenario is that they win (too) easily, lose a bit of their edge, and then lose in Denver on Monday.

You know what the Hawks real problem is? Lots of candidates: terrible owner, terrible president, terrible GM, Trent Yawney, lousy sterile new building. But the real problem is their name. The name "Hawks" is pretty much a permanent whammy for a sports team. Witness:

The Atlanta Hawks (NBA): presently 0-8 on the season. Haven't even appeared in the NBA Finals since moving to Atlanta in 1968. Star forward Bob Pettit led the franchise to its only championship--in St. Louis in 1958.

The Seattle Seahawks (NFL): haven't won a playoff game since January 1984. They're getting all sorts of people excited with their 7-2 record at the moment. These people have short memories.

Our friends the Blackhawks, who last hoisted the Stanley Cup in 1961, thanks to Bobby Hull, Stan Mikita, and Glenn Hall. They're an Original 6 team and only have 3 Cups in total! They've also missed the playoffs 6 of the past 7 years (cough).

There's no baseball teams named the Hawks, but the most famous recent player nicknamed Hawk never even played in the World Series in his 21 seasons.

Time for Calgary's 4th shutout of the season, I figure. Puck drops at 7PM MST, Rogers Sportsnet West. Go Flames.

So have goalies been paying the price, physically, for the NHL rule changes? There's a lot of contradictory and inconclusive information out there, but also a fuzzy notion that it's Open Season on Goalies. The recent addition of Martin Brodeur to the Competition Committee, intentional or not, reinforces this notion, indicating that maybe the NHL is worried too.

This Bucky Gleason column (ÞOddMan) offers the following numbers:

In the first month, 23 had been injured, 69 had appeared in at least one game, and 85 wound up on an NHL roster... Atlanta started five goalies in its first 10 games, a first in the NHL... At least 10 goalies had suffered groin injuries.

I count four broad reasons why goalies might be getting injured. The first is described by Ryan Miller:

Miller wondered if goalies are simply getting worn down from so much activity. Scoring and scoring chances have skyrocketed, which means goalies are being forced to stretch, sprawl and scramble more than ever.

It stands to reason that if sometimes (i.e. previously) goalies get injured making saves, or in the normal course of playing their position, then more saves, more scoring chances, and more work by the goalies will result in more injuries. I can't see that there's anything to be done about this: of all the faults you might find with a more wide-open game, "goalies having to work more" isn't likely one of them.

The second is the frequently-mentioned "ice quality", especially in the case of the groin injuries. Assuming this is a problem (something I don't doubt), again, there's not a lot that can be done--certainly not in the context of "modifying the rules of the game". There are enormous expenses and engineering challenges associated with maintaining good ice. If you wanted to decree that (say) Tampa needs to put in place a scheme that provides excellent ice quality in all seasons, it would necessarily require tens of millions of dollars, reducing spectator comfort, and possibly an engineering solution that doesn't yet exist. I assume that this cost-benefit analysis has basically been completed by the NHL and its teams, and this is where we are. There is no quick or cheap fix for ice problems.

Third is the reduced size of the goalie equipment: the Gleason piece notes that some goalies were injured "while wearing smaller equipment", but this is pretty far from saying it was "because of...". This is an open question, as far as I can tell.

Fourth and finally, we have the problem of players "crashing the net", or more specifically, goalies being injured via direct physical contact with opposing players. Whatever the seriousness or extent of this problem, this is something that can be addressed by Colin Campbell, the Competition Committee, et al.--but how best to do that?

When the NHL wants to discourage some act, they can either (A) penalize that act directly or (B) make it more difficult, via other rules, for players to commit that act. Take shooting the puck over the glass to stop the play, for example: the NHL wanted to discourage this, so they made it a minor penalty. They could have made the glass 15 feet higher and achieved the same result: much fewer occasions where a player stops play by putting the puck over the glass.

Similarly, the alternatives to minimize players roughing up the goalies are as follows: (A) penalize it, or (B) let defensive players physically prevent attackers from getting near the net.

I'd propose (A), because I think it will work better, and has much fewer unwanted consequences. In fact, I think the scheme that the NHL is currently using to discourage diving is a good model. In essence, the league should initiate discipline against players (especially repeat offenders) who are physically abusing goalies, regardless of whether there was a penalty called on the play or not.

A good example of what I'm thinking of is Kirk Maltby shoving Jussi Markkanen late in regulation time of yesterday's Oilers win. Although it can be really difficult for referees to determine goalie interference, and whether an attacker was pushed or "acted alone", the ref made the right call. Now although an Attempt to Injure match penalty would have been excessive on the spot, I don't see why Colin Campbell couldn't send Maltby a warning letter, telling him that he's on a watch list of players who initiate contact with goalies, and that future instances will result in supplementary discipline (increasing fines and suspensions). The league office has the advantage of being able to review tapes from various angles to determine who's respecting goalies and who isn't, and can enforce discipline as strictly as they choose.

The other advantage of this strategy is that frankly, defensemen do a lousy job of protecting goalies. They're always shoving attackers into their own goalie, tripping attackers as they head for the net, etc. It's even worse right now, since they're afraid to step right in front of them, but they're still swiping their sticks around the attackers' feet.

The best scenario for the protection of goalies is for defenders to be confident that attackers aren't going to run the goalies; that is, to be confident that goalies are protected by the rules, and that those rules will be enforced. If Kirk Maltby knows that next time he runs into a goalie he's suspended for three games, even if he sells it to the ref (at the time) that he was pushed, he's not going to.

I hope whatever solutions the NHL comes up with, if needed, are no more nutty or convoluted than mine.

Way back at the end of September, Chris Selley's guest contribution had this bit:

Goalies remain untouchable no matter if they're in their crease (which is good for exactly what these days?), in their ridiculous trapezoid or roving around on the white ice.

I've been meaning to mention this since it happened in a game I was watching, but the crease is treated specially in at least one circumstance. Here's Rule 78d:

If (i) a goalkeeper initiates contact with an offensive player who is in the goal crease; and (ii) such contact is (a) initiated by the goalkeeper in order to establish position in his goal crease; and (b) results in an impairment of the goalkeeper's ability to defend his goal, and a goal is scored, the goal will be disallowed.

Rather unremarkable in print (and I apologize if this is well-known to everyone but me), but what it means, in conjunction with the rest of Rule 78, is that a goal can be disallowed because of "goaltender interference" without the skater getting a penalty for "goaltender interference".

Or in the old, general sense, the onus remains on the skater to stay out of the goalie's way within the crease, regardless of intent. In areas outside the crease, the skater's intent is key.

Well folks, after 14 and one half years of university skoolin', I believe I may have just handed in my final assignment. Sure I still have one more oral exam to go, but who ever flunks those things (knock loudly on wood).

Speaking of not flunking tests, how about those Oilers vs Colorado. I didn't see or listen to the game, but I did see the highlight of Hemsky's dipsy-doodle around Bergeron. Sa-weet! That really turned the corner from an unsuccesful road trip to a decent one - but oh what could have been if they hadn't sleepwalked through a couple of games vs Chicago and Nashville.

Another big test goes down tonight with the Red Wings in town. They're likely going to be a bit choked after losing to the Flames last night. Who knows, maybe I'll even watch this one.

A tentative (or even) 1st period, followed by two periods of Flames-style domination--that's how I saw tonight's game, which ties a team (but not franchise) record for consecutive wins.

Since the game went across the country tonight on TSN, I'd be interested to hear what "outsiders" thought of the performance. What I saw was one of those nights when just about every time a puck popped loose, or got fired around the boards, it went to a Flame. It's hard to explain (let alone justify) why this happens when the Flames are playing well, but it's as obvious as the space for rent on Pierre McGuire's head.

Thanks to regular commentor jhuck for the fine pic of Chelios laughing at a GM Place fan's sign; I've seen it before, but had totally forgotten about it.

Flames go for #9 on Friday v. Chicago. I have a karma-destroying post in mind already; plus, I hear that Mark Bell can be dangerous.

And FYI for those of you with Matt-overload; Sacamano has finished a major project today, and after some rest and recovery, should be back chirping helplessly at me shortly. Late-

At least in the coach's office at Commonwealth Stadium! TSN.ca breaking news:

"The Edmonton Eskimos have announced that quarterback Ricky Ray will start on Sunday against the B.C. Lions in the West Division Final."

Control Tower guy: "Captain, maybe we oughta turn on the searchlights now."
Rex Kramer: "No... that's just what they'll be expecting us to do."

Tonight (630PM MST) the Flames take on the Detroit Red Wings, and try to extend their winning streak to 8 games. Retired bobsledder Chris Chelios should be in uniform, contrary to this Loyola Phoenix article describing him as "former NHL hockey player Chris Chelios" (though if you're interested in an update on the Greek bobsled team, click through).

There's a funny bit about Competition Committee member Brendan Shanahan in today's Eric Francis column:

The way Brendan Shanahan tells it, he was sitting in a restaurant with teammates, minding his own business while watching Monday's Calgary Flames-Minnesota Wild game.

"There was a bad call and suddenly everybody looks at me," explains Shanahan, pausing for dramatic effect.

"I said, 'What?' and they all started booing me.

Although it looks like he has the same motto as Edmonton's mayor:

"When I get guys coming up and complaining to me, I say, 'Great, if you're so interested, put your name in the hat and in three years you'll be sitting in those nine-hour meetings. I'll be golfing.'"

So there. And in the Herald today, Jean Lefebvre thinks "the emergence of Chuck Kobasew" is the biggest Flames story through one-quarter of the season. I'm loving watching Kobasew the past few games, and statistically, I think we ain't seen nothin' yet. But I can't accept the argument that Dion Phaneuf's play and his five goals are less of a surprise than Kobasew's seven.

Lefebvre says Phaneuf, "was eagerly anticipated by too many to be considered a huge surprise." Naahh. I'd have to check the replay, but I'm pretty sure more pundits supposed a 30-goal season for Kobasew than a 20-goal season for Phaneuf. And every time Phaneuf's been on the ice for a goal against, whether SH or EV, I've taken a decent look at the highlights to try to find fault. Much more often than not, he's been in nice position, and someone else was playing matador (e.g. Wiemer on Minnesota's 1st goal Monday).

Tonight's game is televised nationally on TSN. I think the streak comes to an end with a non-close result, but I hope I'm wrong--and if I am, I think I might start getting pretty excited. Go Flames.

Maybe I'm being obstinate, or wilfully blind, but I was terribly irritated to turn on my radio and hear how the Flames' 3rd period comeback last night was thanks in large part to the New NHL.

The narrative here is familiar: Minnesota is a good defensive team, and they have an excellent record when leading by two goals after the 2nd period (surprise!). So, the fact that the Flames scored three in the final 20 minutes is evidence that Minnesota Wild Hockey is doomed, and thank heavens for that, boy-oh-boy.

This makes perfect sense, unless you actually watched the game. John Garrett used replay to show pretty clearly how the Wild was making it very difficult for the Flames to move the puck up the ice. And it was! The Flames had 25 shots, and I can't think of one that was generated of anything resembling an end-to-end play.

If Calgary had tried to counter the Wild's scheme with sharp passing and good puckhandling, they would have lost 2-0. The entirety of the comeback was accomplished with their legs, and I don't know that there's many other teams in the league that could have done it.

Dump the puck in, hope for a lucky bounce or a mishandled clearing attempt, and start cycling. This is how all Calgary's even-strength chances were created. I suppose you could argue that they wouldn't have had the PP chances last season, but I'm not sure I buy that--as I've noted before, I think the extent of clutch-and-grab (and 3rd period whistle-in-the-pocket) in the Bad Old NHL is way overstated in retrospect.

The Wild's problem, in general, is that they don't create enough scoring chances (Gaborik and White, among others, were out last night). Their additional problem last night was that they couldn't match Calgary's energy in the 3rd period. Their additional problem, one they share with 28 other NHL teams, is that they can't stop Jarome Iginla when he's playing well.

Which reminds me: there was a classic moment on the TV post-game show. They were talking to Langkow and asking him about his (game-tying) goal, and Langkow was watching the tape as he was answering:

"Well, we were controlling the puck along the boards, and then I moved into the high slot and Jarome made a nice pass... whoa. .....I didn't know it was that nice...."

Stopped in mid-cliche; a magic moment.

Chris Selley talks goaltending:

So sorry, but a goaltender cannot "save" his team while giving up two soft goals. He just can't. You can't save someone from a crisis that you yourself created — all you can do is salvage a little bit of redemption, and Belfour didn't even do that. What he did was bank one solid period and then put it in the tank. Despite Leafs fans' unfailing willingness to climb inside their goaltender's head for in search of forgiveness — he was screened, it was a rolling puck, why the hell did Berg put his stick out?, he was distracted by a flashbulb, that was goalie interference!, well maybe if we had a Canadian captain he wouldn't have to make those saves, etc. — the fact remains that Edward Belfour's job is to stop all the routine shots and a huge majority of the "unstoppable" ones. These days, it's not happening. I like Belfour, and I know he starts slow, but the facts are the facts.

My emphasis, as one of my biggest pet peeves in hockey coverage is the old, "if it hadn't been for Kipper [or Cujo, Jussi, Theodore, whoever], the game would have been over in the 1st period". I understand commending a goalie for good performance when his team is outshot and outchanced, but I wish hockey writers (& broadcasters) would resist this compulsion to describe it as if the alternative was a Shooter Tutor. (The Meatriarchy is no more impressed with Belfour lately than Selley is.)

Chris also takes a crack at an elusive and controversial subject in another post: depth. Ask ten hockey pundits and get ten different definitions. I quite liked this graf:

[Janne Niinimaa would] just be another log in the jam, another medium-name non-Canadian defenseman brought to Toronto on reputation alone as the latest sink for the disappointment of the Leaf Nation, which among many other feats of imbecility is capable of simultaneously demanding the veteran blue line presence of men it has never seen play hockey and kvetching that its beloved team never develops any of its own talent.

Read the whole thing.

I was pretty much dead inside after two periods--no enthusiasm whatsoever (clearly, the Flames play rubbed off on me). But that 3rd period kicked-ass:

• Less than ten minutes in, the shots in the period were 17-5, and faceoffs were 14-4
• Jarome - the winner was a beauty, but the pass on the tying goal was something else
• Before Jarome scored the PP winner, I was sending out my best mindwaves to the Flames: "Remember Special Ed in Game 7!" I fully expected a makeup call if the Flames weren't careful, meaning that the Wild would have a PP for a while if it went to OT.
• As it turned out, they took the lead first, then took a penalty, then another one. So, with the goalie pulled, it was a 6-on-3 for the last 30-odd seconds for the Wild, and when the horn went, there was a delayed penalty on the Flames--if it went to OT, the Flames might as well have just given Minnesota the extra point and gone home

Seven straight wins feels pretty good. Red Wings on Wednesday on TSN. Final 3rd period shots were 25-7 Flames. Apparently Blogger is going down shortly, so if I have anything else, look for it in the comments. Go Flames!

Tonight the Flames take on the Minnesota Wild for the third time this season; in each of the previous two meetings, the home team won in rather convincing fashion.

With the Flames riding a six-game winning streak, I don't have much to say besides "Feed the fire", so instead of some in-depth hockey analysis, I'm going to nominate Wild defenceman Willie Mitchell for a spot on the Reggie Cleveland All-Stars. Per Wikipedia:

A fantasy award team created by Bill Simmons for sports figures whose names do not match their ethnicity, but especially white players with African-American-sounding names.

As it happens, Reggie Cleveland is from Swift Current, Saskatchewan. Willie Mitchell is from Port McNeill, British Columbia (or from Ashland, Mississippi, depending on how carefully you Google).

• With his hat trick yesterday, Craig Conroy surpassed last season's goal total (8 in 63 games) in the Kings' 18th game. As I've mentioned before, I sure wish he was still wearing the Flaming C.
• It may still be the worst division in football, but all four NFC Norris teams won yesterday, and Minnesota & Green Bay did it on the road against decent squads.
• How can you tell the Seahawks are about to screw the pooch? By the stories today explaining how finally, this time, they're for real (e.g. The Wait is Over - bwahaha).
• Darren Flutie, doing colour for yesterday's Esks-Stamps tilt, demonstrated the right way to be a homer. I really could care less if an announcer has a preference as to the outcome of a game (Flutie actually caught himself saying "we" in reference to the Eskimos a couple of times). The problem is when that prefence is manifested as apologies on behalf of the team, their coach, players, etc.. He was plenty critical (and generally in an intelligent fashion) of the Eskimos; the fact that it was in the context of wanting them to win didn't detract from his performance at all, to my ears.
• And the NHL Northeast Division is still the toughest one thus far, but check these notes from the bottom of the Detroit-Vancouver recap:

The Canucks are 7-0 against the other two Western Conference divisions, but just 4-5-2 in the Northwest Division that they lead. The Central Division-leading Red Wings are 8-0 against teams in their own division, but just 2-2-1 against the Northwest.

More from Cosh in the post Sacamano linked below:

I wonder if it's a coincidence that the real war on the Battle of Alberta weblog has involved Flames-loving host Matt sitting back, smirking, and pretending to hover loftily above his own team's struggles while the Oiler fans who comprise the majority of the site's readership rend their flesh like teenage goths. Calgary hasn't been discernibly better than the Oilers this year, and its fans were habituated to much higher expectations in the pre-season. The team was even tipped to win the Stanley Cup by the thinly-educated guessers at Sports Illustrated. Since I only get to hear my own city's talk radio, I have no idea whether the Zen calm Matt attempts to project is widely shared, or whether our southern twin is as full of whimpering neurotics as Edmonton is. My instinctive suspicion is that the Flames' ticketholders are mostly bedwetting corporate lawyers who grew up resenting jocks and never quite cottoning to Peter Puck's explanation of the offside rule. Too busy to give a maiden aunt's crap about hockey: that's Calgary. Don't you know it's hard work transforming a worldwide energy crisis into a giant pyramid of cocaine and fifty-dollar beefsteaks?

First of all, I love the shades-of-McBain in that last sentence. (Q. How are Flames fans dealing with the fact that, 20 games in, their team isn't completely dominating the NHL? A. On top of a pile of money, with many beautiful ladies.)

But more to the point, while I'm less excitable than most, I think my outlook is fairly typical. I think "habituated" is exactly the wrong word to use regarding the expectations of Flames fans. The most successful run the Flames had in 15 years (the "Red Mile Era", a.k.a. the 2004 playoffs), they went 15-11 (5-7 at home). Their longest winning streak was four games, overlapping the Detroit and San Jose series.

This isn't to downplay their accomplishment in the slightest, but rather to point out that it's entirely understandable why fan mobs aren't egging Darryl Sutter's house after a 1-3-1 road trip. Contemporary Flames fans have no handy frame-of-reference for what constitutes a great regular season, or what a Stanley Cup champion looks like in autumn. I suspect most fans look at things the same way as I do: Kipper looks solid, Iginla's still the man, the D has come around from those terrible first 4 games--things should work out.

I should also point out that, contrary to Cosh's fantastic Russian serf analogy, this attitude is by no means something inherent to Calgary and not Edmonton. In the 1st round of the 1990 playoffs, less than 12 months after the Flames won their 1st Cup, Allan Maki wrote a front-page column in the Calgary Herald calling for coach Terry Crisp to be fired immediately, i.e. before the next game. For roughly 10 years ('86-'95), Calgary fans and media were as fickle and flesh-rending as they come.

And finally, there's this: the statement that "Calgary hasn't been discernibly better than the Oilers this year" becomes less tenable every day, set against the reality of the sports pages. Why have I "hovered loftily" above my team's struggles? How about because I'm right? Here's what I wrote on October 31st after the Flames gave up a 2-goal lead to San Jose in the 3rd and lost in a shootout:

The thing I'm happy to report about listening on Saturday is that it wasn't a Guillotine game. I wasn't expecting bad things to happen. I still expect good things from the Flames, and no doubt they'll fulfill those expectations through November.

You can't call it cockeyed optimism, or anything like it, when it turns out to be 100% accurate. I'm pretty confident that there's a lot of red cards in the Flames' deck, and after their next loss, I'll be just as sure. (Although a 2-goal loss to the Blackhawks would be tough to take).

Cosh has posted what can verily be described as an epic contribution to the Battle of Alberta.

It is devastating in its assessment of Flames fans and inspiring in its celebration of Chris Pronger.

It is the final paragraph, however, that truly distinguishes the piece as he accomplishes nothing short of defining the very душа [dusha] of an Oilers Fan. Reading it evokes perhaps the rarest and most momentous of human emotions - that of awakening to a new self-awareness. It is at once terrifying and liberating.

Matt Addendum: Yeah, about 3 weeks ago I said that the most remarkable individual stat thus far is Rod Brind' Amour taking 43% of Carolina's face-offs. Although he's kept that pace up, I think the "eight" Cosh notes takes the cake:

...[Eric Brewer] has accrued 35 penalty minutes trying to contain enemy forwards in the "new NHL". Pronger's current total (eight minutes in all, earned while playing 28 minutes a night) qualifies him--without one hint of exaggeration or sarcasm--as history's unlikeliest candidate for the Lady Byng Trophy.

Indeed.

Eskies win, Oilers lose. Normally that's a push, but tonight it is most definitely a win.

There is nothing more gratifying than to see Jason Maas get rewarded. Seriously, has there been a better story in sports this year than him?

Here's a guy who has been forced to play second banana his whole career, despite delivering the goods every single time he gets the call. It's inexplicable.

Read this summary of Maas's career in Wikipedia - it's like a Greek Tragedy.

And yet, he has been nothing but gracious and supportive of the guys playing in front of him. Unbelievable.

As much as I am happy that the Eskimos won, I am infinitely happier that it was Maas who made it happen.

Matt-Update: I don't love the Stamps so much as I detest the Green & Gold, so I've felt worse about a loss. (And I can't argue with sacamano's Maas take). Four (six? nine?) fumbles is simply awful, and indicative of "not paying enough G.D. attention to the task at hand"--it seemed to be that mentality in the second half, as much as the actual fumbles, that cost the Stamps the game.

That said, the difference between the Stampeder organization of 12 months ago and the one today is just astounding (and makes Ottawa's hiring of John Jenkins as their new coach all the more certifiably insane). Things are good in Stamp land, and better yet, they'll continue to improve.

Tonight's Western Semifinal marks this year's first truly important Battle of Alberta

There is no doubt that Calgary has the momentum after spanking the Eskimos last week to steal home-field advantage. But Edmonton certainly has experience on their side - it is hard not to after making the playoffs 34 years in a row.

Edmonton may have the most inconsistent, frustrating team I've ever supported. Seriously, at times they look unbeatable, at other times they look like a junior team. I really don't know what to make of them or what to think about tonight's game. Any prediction would just be a shot in the dark and I don't want to mess with any football mojo so I'm not making any picks.

Let's just hope that Old Sean Fleming shows up rather than New Sean Fleming.

Oiler's Game Day vs Chicago

I'm not making a separate post for this because, well, I'm lazy. But, I will predict a 4-2 Edmonton win and that Kolanos endears himself to his new fans by scoring the game winner.

Also, Battle of Ontario reports that Allison may be on the block. Would Edmonton have enough to get a slow overpaid centre?

There's two principal ways in which a metaphor (or simile, analogy, etc.) can fail:

1. the comparison is inappropriate or nonsensical
2. the comparison is brutally cheesy or strained

For illustrative purposes, George Johnson in today's Calgary Herald is pretty helpful. Check these out.

All week, his inability to solve the ever-reshaping Rubik's Cube that devilish Denny Creehan keeps thrusting in front of him has been the talk of the town.

Reshapes a cube? That is devilish!

The media has been chewing on the Ricky issue like an old hound dog gnawing at a soup bone.

Ouch.

Ricky Ray is the man caught squarely in the crosshairs this afternoon, and not only those of a rampaging Rahim Abdullah or a blitzing John Grace coming like a bat out of hell off the edge, either.

Slow down, George!

...he looked completely out of answers; like a guy plucked off the street trying to decipher a law entrance exam.

Oh, mmm-hmm...

One hour to either set the record straight or continue the climb out of the grave and into the light.

Right then! There's more, if you click through.

"George Johnson writes five columns weekly for the Herald sports pages. He has 26 years of experience in sports journalism, starting with the now-defunct Winnipeg Tribune, a weekly tabloid in Winnipeg, as well as the Manitoba Sports Scene, the Winnipeg Sun, the Edmonton Sun and the Calgary Sun."

I suppose you could find evidence for just about anything in tonight's 5-3 Flames win. My take (this may surprise you) is that the Flames really are the team to beat in the Northwest Division.

Sure, 2 weeks ago when they were 4-7-2, chatter about the SI cover jinx and everything else seemed appropriate. Now? Wanna get someone on the Avalanche to say that the Flames got lucky tonight?

How about the Canucks? They're a good team, and they may be as good as the Flames, but do you think they have anyone who thinks the Flames are the flukes-back-to-earth of 2005/06?

Maybe I'm wrong. Maybe "team to beat" is going too far. But what was locked in for me tonight was that the Flames do have all the capabilities we saw in the preseason predictions, and that they do control their own destiny to a great extent.

**(pictured Metallurg coach was with the Flames last time they won 6 straight--this will be its own post one of these days)

One of these days, or years, the Colorado Avalanche are going to have a season like their NHL predecessors in Denver. The Avs are presently 9-4-2 and have the best Win% in the Northwest Division, despite the fact that on paper, they should be quite a bit worse than last season.

• Peter Forsberg is out, Pierre Turgeon is in
• Adam Foote is out, Patrice Brisebois is in
• Joe Sakic 18 months older (here's Joe's 1987 draft class: just about every player that's still active was considered over-the-hill before the lockout)
• Rob Blake 18 months older (another guy whose draft contemporaries are well past their primes)
• Their young players are fairly unheralded

Maybe they will take a turn for the worse (starting tonight would suit me fine), but so far they've been thumping their Northwest Division rivals like it's 2001.

Grapes, Stan Fischler's 1982 biography of Don Cherry, has plenty of uncomplimentary Hardy Astrom anecdotes, but here's one from hhof.com:

Giving the red light a workout was never a concern while Hardy Astrom was in goal for Don Cherry's Colorado Rockies in 1979-80. "First practice in Colorado, we were working on breakout drills. I shoot the puck at Hardy from the far blue line, and it goes right through his legs. 'Fluke,' I figure, so I shoot another one. Right through his legs again. 'Next drill,' I said.

Actually, Hardy was a nice guy, he just had a weakness with pucks."

Tonight's prediction: Aebischer lets some in, but no weak ones, and the Flames win 5-2 for their first 6-game win streak in over a decade. Go Flames.

You don't have to be crappy to be outshot 13-2 in a period by the Columbus Blue Jackets...but it helps! Am I right folks?

I wouldn't have bothered with this snark, but I think sacamano is otherwise occupied, and Covered In Oil seems to have discontinued their Game Review feature.

I didn't watch much of the game - is it a coincidence that Peca, Hemsky, and Dvorak all had the same ice time? If they were playing on the same line, it's worth noting that Wild Card Hemsky had no shots on goal (at least from below crossbar level) and barely registered on the scoresheet.

Also, I'm still liking Ray Ferraro, and Columbus is awful without Rick Nash. The game he played in Calgary on one stem, he looked more dangerous than the rest of their team put together.

The two hottest teams in the Northwest battle in the HNIC late game tomorrow. Back with a preview before the game.

So yesterday I took a crack at quantifying good coaching. I realized going in that the effort was probably futile: there's so many variables in team performance besides "Is the coach doing a good job?" that I seriously doubt we'll ever be able to numerically separate coaching performance from team performance". Coaches will continue to be discussed in terribly subjective terms: "the players have really bought in", "they've tuned out", "the players respect him", "he's not tough enough on them", etc. etc.

Anyway, my hypothesis was based on the CW about "a good road game" and "a good home game", and attempted to determine whether Road Success relative to Home Success (RSrtHS) could be correlated with good coaching.

The answer was Maybe/Inconclusive, but then Tim and sacamano had a couple of interesting comments. callmeteem:

Sometimes homecrowds can be a disadvantage. I am thinking particularly of the Montreal crowd where it seems the pressure can be unique--particularly on young players.

sacamano:

I was going to say that length of travel and duration of roadtrips might have some effect (i.e., teams in the West get screwed because of the brutal travel schedule)...

I decided to run the numbers for the previous two seasons as well. For the three seasons 2001-2004, each team was ranked by RSrtHS from 1st to 30th. I then averaged each team's rank over the three seasons, and used the averages to rank them all again from 1st to 30th, giving us RSrtHS for the past three seasons. That's a decent sample size: 123 home and 123 road games for each team. And look what we have here:

Eastern Conference teams are highlighted. Not exactly an random-looking distribution, is it? The six teams with the worst RSrtHS are all from the West: in short, home-ice advantage has meant the most to them (reminder: this is different from saying they're the best home teams). Give sacamano a cigar.

And I think Tim has earned one too. If was to choose the two cities where the fans are quickest to turn on the home team when things go bad (not on call-in shows or message boards, but right there in the stadium), I'd pick New York and Philly. Maybe it's a coincidence, but the two best road teams over the past 3 seasons, relative to their own home records, are the Rangers and the Flyers.

So what do have here, in the end?

1. A theory about dispassionately evaluating coaching performance debunked;

2. Another way of showing that the travel schedule of Western teams really is a bugger; and

3. Maybe, just maybe, some evidence that it really is important to support the home team, no matter how they're playing. Jennifer Kapitski, you have my qualified apology.

Season Record: 8-8-1	Season Record: 5-11-0

Simply a must win for the Oil tonight. Markkanen will get the start and Peca and Reasoner should be back in the game

In other interesting news, the Oilers have claimed Krys Kolanos off of waivers from Phoenix.

I seem to recall that Lowe has wanted him for a while, although I'm not entirely sure why. He's a big Alberta boy who had a decently promising rookie season (22 points in 50 games - 8th in rookie scoring with 6 game winners) but then suffered a concussion and hasn't done much since. I'm actually not sure what to think about this move. Here's Gretzky's quote:

It's pretty simple. First of all, he's a nice young man. We just feel at this point in time maybe he needs a change, maybe he needs a new venue.

Who do we have to get rid of to make room for him? I hope it isn't Reasoner. I've said it before, but Reasoner is Mr. Everything and is instant chemistry. You can put him on any line and not worry. Laraque? Rita? Winchester?

On the other hand, he is an asset(?) obtained for free and does have potential . . .

Thoughts?

Hey, remember the last time a forward line got 18 shots on goal in a game? Me neither, but it happened tonight for Kobasew, Reinprecht, and Iginla in the most one-sided 4-3 game I can recall.

Shots were 43-23 Flames, which certainly underrepresents the margin and number of scoring chances. But as dominant as the team was, Jarome Iginla's performance was that much better.

A penalty shot goal. Two assists. Go look at the highlights of the 2nd one; I think if you could read his lips, you'd find him yelling to his teammates, "There! Is that net wide enough open for you clowns?"

He also tuned up Keith Ballard with about 3 minutes left in the game for the official Gordie Howe hat trick.

But it wasn't even the numbers, so much as him generally doing whatever he wanted out there, and even moreso, performing very well in the non-spontaneous moments: I'm thinking of the penalty shot and the fight, here. In both of those instances, that extra time seemed to augment his advantage, where too often in the past it has subverted it.

Since the Flames headed out on their 2nd road trip of the year (Game 9), Iginla has absolutely been as good as he's ever been. Tonight's Man of the Match, with a pretty wife to boot: Jarome Iginla, ladies and gentlemen.

The Flames take on the Coyotes tonight for the 3rd time already this season, hoping to follow up their perfect homestand with a rare-thus-far road win. Last time out, "The Brick Sit-house" Mike Comrie came off a game as a healthy scratch to score the winner with 1:28 left.

CuJo has always played the Flames tough (although he was just accommodating enough last spring), and for some reason, the Coyotes have just about always had the Flames number -- since moving from Winnipeg, anyway (payback is a bugger).

Unrelated P.S.: Detroit's win yesterday gave them a 22 point on St. Louis in their division. Hobos indeed.

Unrelated P.P.S.: I missed this bit from Allan Muir last week, but chuckled at it today:

An online oddsmaker has made Canada the favorite to win Olympic gold in Turin. The same oddsmaker also went out on a limb and named March the heavy favorite to follow February.

From his lips to the hockey gods' ears, let's hope.

Cosh makes a relevant comment to my last post about Coach Roy and Coach Gretzky:

Gretzky will have total freedom to implement a plan, but it won't do him any good unless he actually has one.

I was all set to write a long comment about my suspicion that good road wins and/or a good road record are strong evidence of good coaching, but then I thought I'd do a bit of analysis to see if this bears out at all.

I started with a hypothesis that closely resembles the conventional wisdom: "Success on the road comes from playing a tight system, minimizing chances against, and not making mistakes; success at home comes from high energy, creating lots of chances, and talent riding the home crowd." My corresponding assumption is that the former relates to good coaching (smart system, on-ice player discipline, etc.) while the latter has very little to do with good coaching (we can argue here, but I believe the role of coach as "motivator" in professional sports is highly overstated).

So, how to measure this? If my hypothesis is true, then well-coached, under-talented teams will have a (relatively) stronger road record, while poorly-coached, highly talented teams will have a noticeably stronger home record.

Instead of comparing home and road Points Earned (which always slant Home; only 6 teams in '03/04 earned more on the road than at home), I'll compare their Ranks, then take (HomeRk - Road Rk). A large positive number thus indicates a team (and coach?) which is very strong on the road relative to at home, and a large negative number indicates the opposite. All stats from the full 2003/04 season.

The Top 7:

• Boston - Home T18th, Road 1st, Diff. +17.5, Coach Mike Sullivan
• Colorado - Home 20th, Road T2nd, Diff. +17.5, Coach Bob Hartley/Joel Quenneville
• Carolina - Home 26th, Road 14th, Diff. +12.0, Coach Peter Laviolette
• Toronto - Home T13th, Road T2nd, Diff. +12.0, Coach Pat Quinn
• Vancouver - Home T13th, Road 4th, Diff. +10.5, Coach Marc Crawford
• Los Angeles - Home T23rd, Road 13th, Diff. +10.5, Coach Andy Murray
• Calgary - Home 17th, Road T9th, Diff. +7.5, Coach Darryl Sutter

The Bottom 7:

• Dallas - Home 2nd, Road 18th, Diff. -16.0, Coach Dave Tippett
• Islanders - Home T5th, Road T19th, Diff. -15.5, Coach Steve Stirling
• Anaheim - Home T14th, Road 26th, Diff. -11.5, Coach Mike Babcock
• Detroit - Home 1st, Road 11th, Diff. -10.0, Coach Dave Lewis
• St. Louis - Home T8th, Road T15th, Diff. -7.5, Coach Joel Quenneville/Mike Kitchen
• Nashville - Home T8th, Road T15th, Diff. -7.5, Coach Barry Trotz
• Buffalo - Home T13th, Road T19th, Diff. -6.5, Coach Lindy Ruff

Well, what do you think? Are the upper set of coaches "better" in your mind, qualitatively, than the lower set? My answer, on balance, is Yes, although it's hardly conclusive. I don't think you'd find many pro hockey pundits who would agree that Mike Sullivan and the Bruins are the disciplined "systems" team, while Anaheim is (or rather, was) the talented team that plays hard when the crowd is behind them. Also, the fact that Joel Quenneville is on both lists suggests that the whole thing is baloney; though if you follow through with my premise that the coach controls systems and culture, and not "motivation", he belongs on the bottom list w/ St.L, not w/ Col. where he came in midseason and presumably didn't affect the underlying mindset of the team.

If my hypothesis is false, what are the alternative explanations for home/road differential? The first, most obvious candidate is luck; even if there was no human influence on the differential, it would exist, although my math isn't good enough to figure out how much.

I think you can toss out the "great home crowd" factor: Boston and Carolina had weak home crowds, but Colorado and Toronto have loud, supportive crowds. Similarly with the bottom teams, the crowd might spur Detroit and Nashville to greater success, but that doesn't account for why the Islanders and Anaheim were such (relatively) great home teams.

If it's not coaching, and it's not luck, then there is some other quality, measurable or not, that the Top 7 teams have in common (and the Bottom 7 don't). Ideas?

(Math footnote: tie ranks were averaged, e.g. 3 teams tied for 7th/8th/9th would all receive a rank of 8th, for the purposes of the arithmetic operation noted above. Ranks shown next to the team are not averaged, e.g. those same 3 teams would all be shown as T7th.)

If you thought "Pork Sports" was a bad monkier, how about the City of Edmonton's new tourism campaign . . . wait for it . . . . It's Cooler Here!

An obvious play on our fridgid temperatures and our . . . chilly hotel packages?

Do kids these days still use the word cool? I thought everything was "sick".

Besides, I don't know what was wrong with our old slogan: Nunc Nostra Patientia Pro Exremento Nihilum Est.

Thanks in large part to the highly visible, frustrated, and rapid flameouts of Maurice Richard and Magic Johnson, there is a bit of conventional wisdom that holds that superstar players don't make good coaches. We discussed this a bit in the comments before the season, and (seemingly) concluded that this wisdom is not really supported by the evidence.

Which brings us to a headline at ESPN.com today: Quebec Remparts 10-3 since Roy became coach. The Remparts were 1-4 when Roy fired the coach and hired himself as a replacement; now they sit at 11-7, and are the highest-scoring team in the league since Patrick took over.

I find this fascinating. The set of closely-related reasons we tend to use to explain the failure of superstar players as coaches (when it happens) are something like this: bad communicator; they see the game differently than the non-superstar players; they live in a different "hockey world" than mere mortals, and become frustrated at the inability of their own players to see and achieve the same way they did.

To me, insofar as any of these raps are accurate (even if only occasionally), they should be doubly accurate for a superstar goalie. Goalies are famously isolated, and most are poor communicators (and yes, with apologies to Kelly Hrudey, I'll use the ones on TV as evidence supporting this, not contradicting it). Most of the pro hockey they've ever seen is from ice level, and in the case of offensive play, from ice level more than 140 feet away. This particular goalie is famously moody, and at times in his career appeared downright psychologically unbalanced.

So congratulations to Patrick Roy, the greatest goalie in NHL history. Millions of words have been written about his career over the past 20 years, and I can't imagine that the phrase, "This guy's going to make a good coach some day", was in there anywhere.

Standings-watchers may have also noted that the Phoenix Coyotes, who are coached by a guy who used to be a pretty good hockey player, are acquitting themselves pretty well. They had a 1-4-1 start that had them looking like Western Conference basement-dwellers with the Hawks, Blues, and Jackets (and hastened Brett Hull's retirement). Now, they have road wins over the Flames, Oilers, Red Wings, and Wild; no losses by more than 2 goals; and depending on circumstances, are facing the possibility of Curtis Joseph surpassing Martin Brodeur in the Career Wins column.

I don't really know what to make of the Coyotes and their chances, but they are most certainly not underachieving.

Another classic stomach punch loss.

This media release from the Flames should be dated April 1st, shouldn't it?

FLAMES JOIN MARKETING PARTNERSHIP WITH ALBERTA PORK

Excerpt:

Called “Pork Sports,” the new marketing program from Alberta Pork is a broad one, designed to build relationships with a range of sports audiences. The Flames hockey agreement involves prominent signage at hockey games, major contests on the Alberta Pork Web site www.albertapork.ca and extended opportunities for pork products in the concession areas at sporting events. Pork Sports also involves other initiatives such as new retail efforts for reaching into and supporting the community at a local level.

To be clear, I have no problem with this voluntary arrangement, and I'm always delighted to have more pork choices at the concession. I just think it's the worst name ever for a marketing program. Also, this is a strange quote to find in a media release from a professional sports team:

"Pork is a high quality, lean protein source that meets the nutritional needs of athletes and their fans..."

Don't forget delicious! Enter to win free tickets to a Flames or Oilers game (c/w guided arena tour and autographed sweater) here.

Given the injuries and overall lack of depth on the blueline, would the Oil be interested in getting Janne Niinimaa back?

Apparently he's having some troubles on Long Island. Similar to trouble he had with the Finnish national team. I don't recall there every being rumblings about that sort of stuff when he was in Edmonton.

Janne was legitimately crushed when he was traded from the Oilers, and he has never really found his mojo since. He also had a knee injury, which likely didn't help.

I think it is fair to say that Oilers fans had a bit of a love/hate relationship with Janne, but that it was probably more love than hate. He certainly made his share of "boneheaded plays", to quote Rod Phillips, but he was generally reliable and was certainly tough.

Perhaps too tough for today's NHL - I see that he is the 5th most penalized d-man in the league.

Would he help? What would it take to get him out of NY?

No doubt Dion Phaneuf impressed a lot of people last night. With only two other games on the schedule, the GWG and 2A is an attention grabber, and it's probably correct to say that he's now performed himself into everybody's Rookie of the Year discussions.

Chatter on the radio post-game last night supposed how he could actually win the Calder, the conclusion being essentially enough GMs in the league saying, "yeah, Crosby's great, but I'd still rather have the kid in Calgary".

I guess that could happen, but I'm pretty skeptical. Crosby's on pace for over 100 points, and Ovechkin's on pace for over 50 goals (no one since Selanne in 92/93 has done either, as far as I can recall). Even if Phaneuf finishes with 20G and 60 points, which would be spectacular, I don't think the numbers will be good enough to overcome Crosby and/or Ovechkin (or say, Lundqvist with 30-some wins and a 2.00 GAA for a 1st-place Rangers team).

Barret Jackman won the Calder as an all-around defenseman in 2003, but the numbers put up by his competition were anemic--Crosby and Ovechkin will have surpassed them by the Olympic break. Here's a detailed look at the Calder race in 2003 (written by the publisher of ZetterbergFan.com - no points for guessing who he thought deserved the trophy).

Plus, Jackman played with Chopper since Pronger missed almost the entire season, and that defense pair was key to a 99-point Blues season. With the way the Calgary defense is looking right now, Phaneuf is not going to get that kind of top billing or ice time (talk about rolling your lines - ice time on D in Calgary's win last night ranged from a high of 21:21 (Regehr) to a low of 17:56 (Ference)).

Since it's hard to imagine both Crosby and Ovechkin slumping to such a degree that their final numbers are rather pedestrian (say, 30G and 75pts), I'd say the only way Phaneuf wins the Calder is if he keeps doing what he's doing (no guarantee over 82 games), and one or both of the other guys is out for 12+ games with an injury.

All that said--I'd rather have the kid in Calgary.

Season Record: 8-7-1	Season Record: 8-2-3
Head-to-Head: 1-0-0	Head-to-Head: 0-1-0
Last Game: 0-4 Loss vs Stars	Last Game: 2-3 (SO) Loss vs LA

Nashville is on a 5-game skid, and is almost as decimated by injuries as are the Oilers. Out or unknown for tonight are: Nichol, Hall Sullivan, Walker, Peca, Bergeron, Ulanov, Cross, Reasoner). I'm not expecting fantastic hockey tonight, but these are the games you need to win.

Prediction: 3-2

...I don't have to put up with Sacamano pointing at the thru-1/5th-of-the-season conference standings as proof that the Oil is the better team, regardless of the two times they've actually played each other. Huzzah! More tomorrow, I'm sure.

The Oil got whipped tonight, but at least they didn't get scored on by a guy who hasn't played in the NHL since 1998 (check out the assists on Bertuzzi's goal).

**Further to the post below featuring the Calgary Stampeders Fight Song, the Argonotes (Official Band of the Toronto Argonauts!) hosts ~1MB mp3 files of the fight songs for all 9 CFL teams at their website, as well as a couple of Grey Cup tunes. They were "recorded by noted Canadian big band leader Dal Richards in 1968, as part of a record album called Canadian Football Songs."

I don't think you have to hate big band music in general to find these songs to be pretty horrifying. (Bonus info: the B.C. Lions actually play theirs over the sound system at their games!)

**Offseason blockbuster Oiler addition Mike Peca will be back in their lineup tonight. Super! Always comfortable to insert a slumping player into a lineup that's carrying good momentum - that means the team will lift the player up, right? To be fair, Peca did play in the 1st two games of the Oil's current win streak, and contributed in the form of 35 minutes of ice time, 1 assist, Even, 2 shots, 1 penalty, and 24 of 44 faceoffs won (54.5%).

**Kipper won NHL Defensive Player of the Week honours, with nutty numbers: 0.33GAA, .984Sv%, 2SO in 3GP. Congratulations to Juicy Rebounds for his runner-up finish.

**The Acid Queen (writer of pulp science fiction(!)) has posted the Carnival of the NHL #12. Sacamano and I have some of our favourite hockey blogs listed on the left, but there's more, and like everything else, some are good and some are bad. It's a easy way to find some new reading material.

**And James Mirtle has a nice post up about rookies so far this year, and ranks Dion Phaneuf (NHL leader in missed shots) second. I haven't seen enough other games to really see how he compares to the others, but he's unquestionably exceeded my expectations. I've had one small nit to pick so far (that he's not fastidious enough with the puck when they're setting up the PP), and that could be fixed by next game at the rate he's developing.

I don't think Phaneuf has a snowball's chance at the Calder, because the forwards' numbers are going to be too gaudy. But I think he'll get an honourable mention on just about everyone's list.

Tonight (7PM MST, Sportsnet West) the Flames engage again with the Vancouver Canucks and their historically competent defense.

While the Flames' road record in 2 games against the Northwest Division is to retch over (0-2, 13GA), their home record is nearly without a blemish: four wins, and a grand total of one goal allowed (congratulations, Ethan Moreau).

Stat watch: after Saturday's win over the Canucks, the Flames are up to 24th in the PK rankings (79.2%). Their rank at home? First, baby! (92.5%).

A win tonight would be the cherry of top of a perfect 4-0 homestand. Calgary has already been plenty sportsmanlike and accommodating to Vancouver for the month, thank you (headline in today's Vancouver Sun: "Stamp win feels like one for Lions").

I'll be heading out to a local dive in hopes of swivelling my head between the hockey game and the potential re-emergence of the Peyton Manning Face. I'm picking 35-24 for the Patriots and a 4-2 win in the hockey game. Go Flames.

[Update: I should have mentioned that the Harold Snepsts and Rick Lanz pics were found at this excellent gallery, also featuring Dennis Vervegaert and Paul Reinhart in classic hockey poses. Sorry--no Ivan Boldirev or Blair Macdonald.]

The boys on The Fan 960 were playing this classic, uplifting ditty this morning, and I just can't get it out of my head. (Safe for work, safe for church picnics, safe for junior high pep rallies, etc.).

Hit 'em again, ye men of Calgary
Get on the ball and let's go marching down the field
While there's a goal in sight, play on with all your might
'Til the victory's won, get in and fight, fight, fight!

We're all behind you, men of Calgary
So when your backs are to the wall don't ever yield,
Come on you red and white, we need a win tonight
Hit 'em again, ye men of Calgary!

Thanks to putfile.com, a service we've used a number of times on account of how unbelievably easy it is.

Upload Video and Images - Putfile

Season Record: 8-6-1	Season Record: 8-5-1
Head-to-Head: 1-1-0	Head-to-Head: 1-1-0
Last Game: 7-2 Win vs StL	Last Game: 3-2(SO) Win vs Avs

Eager to move on from the Eskimos dismal performance, I'm going to skip over the results of yesterday's football game to again point out that the Oilers are ahead of the Flames.

Big night tonight -- Edmonton plays Dallas, and Calgary has the back end of a double-header with Vancouver. Both promise to be good entertainment - alas the Edmonton game is PPV only, which means I'll expect to hear some of you rich folks chime-in in the comments section.

Dallas is on a bit of a roll as are the Oilers which should make for a good game. After posting a 1-18-2 record in Dallas since they moved from Minnesota, the Oil have now won two in a row in Texas. A win tonight would pretty much guarantee a successful road trip (assuming they don't go into Chicago and Columbus and stink it up).

Word on the street is that Pronger may not play because of a toe injury sustained while blocking a shot. Are we sure we want to continue blocking shots? Do we have anyone on IR that isn't hurt from getting drilled with a puck?

Jussi gets another start. Clearly Mac-T is going to ride him until he can't stand, which is fine with me.

Prediction: 4-3 Oil (SO)

The stars aligned -- BC lost last night to set up the most important edition of the Battle of Alberta for quite some time.

Some background can be found by scrolling down two posts (or clicking here if that scrolling seems like too much work).

The bottom line is that if Edmonton wins they clinch 1st place in the West and get a bye to the Conference Final, which will be held in Commonwealth Stadium -- Calgary will fall to 3rd place.

If Calgary wins, they clinch 2nd place and get to host the Western Semifinal in McMahon Stadium -- against Edmonton.

On the one hand, I'd obviously like to see Quick Six never even take the field. On the other hand, if Calgary did win today it would sure set up a sweet Western Final rematch between the two teams.

Prediction: Horse for dinner

On a somewhat related note: Farewell to the Throwin' Samoan. He may not be the best coach in the world, but man is he ever a great guy. It was nice to see that his players and the crowd made sure to let him know.

Let me get this out of the way first: listening to the execrable Millen tonight, I was reminded of a little blurb by The Sports Guy on Thursday:

This sounds like one of those Paul Maguire arguments where he makes up the argument with himself -- "I'm gonna tell you right now, that was pass interference, that was definitely pass interference ... watch this replay ... wait, that was not pass interference!"

I felt that way about Millen tonight, except that when the replay ran and showed the opposite of what he was saying, or was totally inconclusive, he wouldn't argue with himself. Yelle for goalie interference? Was there actual contact between Yelle and Auld? And that bit where he was clearly pleased with himself for smacking down Mick McGeough's overheated goal-waving-off: jeez. Millen thought the puck was under Kiprusoff the whole time. Then the replays show the puck going in the net barely after the whistle, and Millen is still cracking on Magoo. "Trying to be the show", eh Millen? Takes one to know one, I suppose.

Anyway, I thought this was the best, most exciting game I've seen all year. There was plenty of scoring chances, and plenty more good D. The refs weren't ignoring obstruction, but they were allowing aggressive play, which is great as far as I'm concerned. Chalk me up, I suppose, as one of the fans who doesn't think more scoring and more entertainment necessarily go hand-in-hand.

• I love the way Special Ed plays. I'd take him on my team any time. (That said, the best part of the Game 7 OT win last spring was Ed leaving the penalty box, after his spazz attack in there when the Canucks scored the equalizer with 6 seconds left in regulation).
• Ohlund is also a hell of a player. I mentioned in the comments to the last post, during the game, what a key matchup that was during the '04 playoffs, and Ohlund really did a great job. The thing was, after 6 games of heavy Flames forechecking, in Game 7 Ohlund was bagged. He had battled Iginla tremendously well during the series, and he wasn't "bad" in Game 7, but by that point Iginla had the physical/energy edge, and he had his finest game as an NHLer.
• Langkow and Amonte both have great hands about half the time; it's incredible that they're never at the same time. At least one of those guys is fumbling the puck on just about every shift they take.
• There was four (4) fights in the game tonight. None of them were super notable, but it's an interesting stat (Blueshirt Bulletin noted the first Rangers fight of the season in the post-mortem of the Thursday game -- their 14th of the year)
• I don't have all the behind-the-scenes info, but whichever Flame was responsible for ensuring that the name of Markus Naslund just about never passed the lips of Jim Hughson, well, they deserve a bonus
• Kelly Hrudey and I apparently had the same thought at the end of the 2nd: we expected that Bertuzzi getting his helmet blasted off on a hard hit by Warrener might wake him up. We were wrong. It was hard to remember, watching Bertuzzi blah around the ice, why there was once a debate over whether he or Iginla was the best "power" forward in the league. The most damning evidence of Bertuzzi's play, tonight for sure, is that the Calgary fans had little or no enthusiasm for booing him.

The Flames are now 5-1-1 at home, 6-1-1 on TV, and 4-0-0 at home vs. the Northwest Division. All these things bode well for the rematch on Monday.

And I'm damn interested to read Tom's take on this game.

The Canucks are in town! Now probably the Flames' biggest rivals, considering the overwhelming one-sidedness of recent history with the puds up north. (Also, unlike Edmonton, when Calgary absolutely had to beat Vancouver to extend their season, they did).

I've mentioned before that winning the Vancouver series was my most satisfying moment of the 2004 playoffs. The Flames were absolutely full value for the series win, and generally carried the play throughout the seven games (pace Greg Millen).

That said, I confess that I didn't really watch Game 3 of the series, as something happened in the 1st intermission:



You see, however briefly, I was the proud papa of the world's youngest Flames fan:



The Canucks went up two games to one on Josh's birthday; they never trailed a series again until Dave Andreychuk was hoisting the Cup. Good times--I anticipate them rolling on tonight. Go Flames.

Since Matt is having trouble writing about the increasingly irrelevant Flames half of the Battle of Alberta, I though it would probably be a good time to bring up the huge Eskimos-Stampeders tilt tomorrow afternoon. Depending on the results of the BC-Sask game tonight, the Edmonton-Calgary game could put Edmonton in 1st -- or it could drop them down to 3rd.

The winner of the Edmonton-Calgary game is guaranteed 2nd place and a home semifinal playoff berth. If the Lions lose tonight vs Saskatchewan and Edmonto wins tomorrow, then the Eskies grab 1st, get the bye, and the Western Final comes home to Commonwealth.

Some of the Stamps are already talkin' trash:

"I'm going out with the intent to make Garrett look bad," said Lewis yesterday. "My intent is to make it so after this year, he won't want to play football again . . . Garrett is too old (to cover me)."

That's the spirit! At least someone in Calgary still has a little bark.

Edmonton has now made the playoffs 34 straight years - a North American pro-sports record.

The Stamps . . . well, they made they won the Grey Cup in 2001 before they:

• sold their team to a couple of Californians with no football experience but with a lot of shoes who only bought the team so that one of their son's could play quarterback;
• had the police escort one of these Californians out of McMahon stadium over a money dispute with the other Californian;
• ran out of town perhaps the best coach in the league and even offered to pay the remainder of his salary if any team would take him because he wouldn't play the aforementioned son;
• got rid one of the top 3 quarterbacks in the league to make room for the son;
• fired another coach 2 days before Christmas for not starting the son - "Happy Holidays!";
• hired their old field-goal kicker Mark McLoughlin as club president - for 56 days - before firing him and promoting the public relations director, instead,
• hired a tv broadcaster with no experience as coach and GM to clean up the mess.

Recently a local group (including the Flames) has bought the team and they've shown signs of that the circus might be ending. Of course, they did hire Tom Higgens as coach and GM after he was fired by the Eskimos.

Anyway, the game should still be a corker.

Ricky Ray needs only 12 completions to break Doug Flutie's 1991 CFL record of 466. He also needs 367 passing yards to break Warren Moon's record of 5648 - that one could be tough to get.

The Stamps are on a roll having won 6 of their last 7. Given the insanity that has surrounded this team, it is actually nice to see them making the playoffs. But it's a bit too early for them to start hosting playoff games again.

Prediction: Eskimos 31-17. I'll also predict that Calgary will have the ball just before half-time, but Higgens will decide not to try for a big play and will instead run out the clock.

P.S. The Inner Circle documentary on Ricky Ray and Jason Maas will by on TSN after the BC/Sask. game tonight. The write-up says that it "gives viewers a behind-the-scenes look at the quarterbacks during Labour Day week. The hotel room, the team bus, the locker-room - no area is out of bounds."

I love that kind of stuff.

Nice result tonight. Fairly ugly game, and they didn't play as well as the score would suggest, but they certainly got the job done. Anytime you win two back to back games on the road you've got to be happy. When the first is against the league's top team and the second is a blowout, you've got to be very happy.

• 26 goals by 13 different players in the last five games sure seems to suggest that the Oilers might have a bit of scoring depth - has this been mentioned before?

• Wow, I guess Pronger wasn't that popular in St. Louis afterall -- only around 6000 fans showed up for a Friday night game. Ouch. Didn't they set an attendance record when Shanahan came back? Maybe Blues fans still haven't forgiven Pronger for that one.

"Pronger, then a fragile-egoed, underachieving 25-year-old, bore the brunt of the fan's wrath. After getting routed by Philadelphia at home on Feb. 3, 1996, Pronger was booed off the ice."

• Speaking of fragile-egoed underachieving 25-year-olds, Semenov had a strong game tonight: 19:30 of icetime, a goal, an assist, +1. Nothing like a bloody war or a sickly season to give young players an opportunity to show their stuff - and he took advantage of it.

• Le GG looked pretty good out there on the penalty kill. I can't believe I just wrote that sentence.

• Dan 'n' Dan the callups did a nice job on the blueline -- although I sure hope D.Smith doesn't get suspended for fighting in the last minute.
  

• For the most part, Jussi was not only solid out there, he looked downright confident

• 29 blocked shots vs 9 for the Blues. I guess that foam puck drill in practice really works -- of course all of our players on IR were hurt blocking shots . . . hmmmm.

• 12 hooking calls - I guess they haven't let up on the new obstruction rules yet.
  

• Ryan Smyth gives the best interviews of any athlete in sports. Fantastic!

Thoughts?


[edit]: DAMN! I just found this photo and now I wish I'd titled this thread "Goin' off the Rails".

Season Record: 7-6-1	Season Record: 2-7-3
Head-to-Head: 0-0-0	Head-to-Head: 0-0-0
Last Game: 4-3(OT) Win vs Detroit	Last Game: 6-5(OT) Loss vs Chicago

This is your classic dangerous game. On paper it looks like the Oil should run away with this one--St. L only has two wins, have lost 6 in a row, have lost 5 home games already, Weight and Overweight aren't playing . . .

On the other side of the ledger, there is often a letdown after beating a top team, the Pronger Homecoming factor, two new d-men, and the first-NHL-game jitters of a brand new goaltender.

I'm expecting the Blues to come out hard, but the Oil to stay the course.

Prediction: 4-2 Oil - Pronger gets his first goal and Syvret gets an assist.


[Edit]: I see that the Oil haven't won in St. L since Feb 13, 1999. Man, looking up these stats for the last few games it would seem like the team hasn't won a road game in years. In any case, they broke the jinx in Dallas and Detroit, I don't see how they won't do it tonight too.

[Edit 2]: Jussi gets the start again, so I'm changing my prediction to 4-1 Oil.

The last time the Edmonton Oilers beat the Calgary Flames in regulation time, Saddam Hussein was still running Iraq.

Neither of these has a thing to do with hockey, but they're very marginally sports-related, so what the hell.

1. Fark Photoshop Contest - Making Violent Video Games Family Friendly (ÞH&R)



2. Spartantailgate.com - The 30,000 Calorie Sandwich (ÞWelch)


Be sure to click through on this one. Funniest supplementary info (tie): A) he did eat it, but it took him fifteen hours, and B) over 18,000 of the calories in the thing come from 154 Tablespoons of canola oil (this is why diets and deep fryers don't mix).

Regehr had Blue Jackets goaltender Marc Denis beat but rang the shot off the iron where the post and crossbar meet.

That's from Steve Macfarlane's piece in the Calgary Sun today about Robyn Regehr's return to action, and the statement is untrue, unsupportable, and/or irrelevant, depending on how you look at it.

I have no compulsion to stick up for goalies, especially since so many of them go on to be terrible analysts on my tee-vee screen. But except for a few rare and specific occasions, a goalie is not "beat" unless the puck goes in the net. In most cases where a shot goes off the post, the goalie deserves credit, not a "whew, close call!"

The perfect example of this is the other post the Flames hit last night: Amonte in the 2nd period. He got into nice shooting position around the top of the circle and fired one off the far post. Just like with Regehr's shot, Roger Millions said, "Amonte had Denis beat, but hit the post".

Except that the camera angle was pretty near right behind the shot, and I don't think it missed Denis' right pad by more than a centimetre. So basically, Denis positioned himself so that there wasn't room for a puck to go in on the far side, and then Amonte proved it. Just who "beat" who here, again?

You hear announcers say the same thing all the time on breakaway dekes, too. "Oh, Smyth had the goalie beat, but then lost control of the puck!" -- as if the goalie had no role to play in this loss of control.

You goalie coaches out there can correct me if I'm wrong, but the aims of a goalie when facing a breakaway in tight go something like this, in order of priority:

1. Poke the puck away (i.e. do not allow a shot)
2. Keep with the dekes and stop the shot
3. Force the guy to make enough moves (or a tough enough move) that maybe he cocks it up himself, even if you can't stay with him

If Ryan Smyth gets J.S. Giguere going the other way, but then loses the puck on a rut, it's not right to call that a win by Smyth, stymied by an act of God. It's a narrow win by Giguere.

So can we all keep this straight? You're not dominating the other team if you're not outscoring them, and you didn't beat the goalie unless the red light went on.

That is all.

Word on the street is that Conklin had to leave Friday's game because of a groin injury.

Does this, finally, spell the end of the Conklin cuppa coffee in Edmonton?

What are the regulations with this? I know for the conditioning stint he could only go down for some defined period (2 weeks?).

So, are we now in a position where we are required to bring him back only to put him on IR?

That's the best thing you can say about tonight's Flames win--2 points (although Regehr's return to the lineup is a really close second).

• Was Wiemer (or I dunno, Dan Quinn) wearing Langkow's sweater out there tonight? The number of times Roger Millions said, "Langkow loses control of the puck" was agonizing.
• Tony Amonte looked pretty good, and had a part in creating some chances.
• I'm loving Phaneuf already, but I don't think he's a point man for a #1 PP unit yet. He's got the shot, but he doesn't quite have the judgement regarding possession and puck movement. That's what I see, anyway--I think he's up to the task when they're set up on the blueline, but getting there, it seems like he's still got a bit of junior mentality (as in, "if I lose the puck, we can always get it back" - not necessarily true, and certainly not easy, in the NHL).
• Kipper's still the man. Anyone else notice that he's back in the Top 10 in GAA, with a 2.47, after the Flames allowed 6/1/7/7 in their 1st four games?

Also, Tuesday was the first night of the season where both the Flames and the Oil won. Tonight was the second. Maybe this dealy's gonna get fired up after all.

Huge win tonight.

I'm too frugal to get pay-per-view, so I could only rely on Rod 'n' Morley--both of whom made sure to mention what a fantastic game it was just to make me feel like even more of a cheapo.

Rod just mentioned that this was Pronger's best game as an Oiler and that he hasn't "seen an Oiler defenseman since Coffey dominate a game like Pronger did tonight."

There was also an interesting tidbit in the Journal today on Pronger. Apparently after games (while playing poker, etc.) he is always talking about the most recent game and analyzing various plays. Smyth only half jokingly mentioned that Pronger actually talked a little too much.

I'm sure I've asked this before, but has Mac-T always shortened his bench so drastically and so quickly during games, or is he actually exhibiting some adaptability?

It sure seems like the injuries to Horcoff and Smyth was one of the big reasons for the Oil's slump. When those two guys are in the lineup the Oilers have been pretty tough. Of course, Todd Harvey is still undefeated as an Oiler. Maybe he's the key.

Anyone out there actually pay to see the game? Thoughts? Hemsky got on the scoresheet a few times--was he just as good as he had been?

The enigmatically named Columbus Blue Jackets come to Calgary tonight. Will they bolster their frontrunner status in the League's Worst Team category? We'll see. I listened to an interview with CBJ coach Gerard Gallant yesterday, and was left with some massively arched eyebrows. He sounds, uh, how should I put this: "undercompetent".

The bigger question at the moment: again, what's with the name? From answers.com:

There are at least four possible factors that may have contributed to the selection of the name.
**At the time the name was first announced, some media reports speculated that because team owner John H. McConnell's favorite color is blue, he had directed that any name selected for the team must contain the word blue.
**The logo for the team that was initially unveiled featured "an insect with an attitude," suggesting that the name is a play on the term Yellow Jackets (a form of bee and the nickname of various other teams, including the Georgia Tech Yellow Jackets). The insect logo was reduced to secondary status before the team began play and was eliminated entirely during the 2003/2004 season. The only remnants of the insect theme is the team mascot, an insect named Stinger.
**The name may have been intended to honour the Shawnee leader Blue Jacket, who lived in the region, but the team has not used any Native American symbolism in its marketing.
**The term Blue Jacket is also a reference to the uniform of the Union army in the American Civil War. The team has included some Civil War references in its marketing, but has not heavily promoted it.

So there. See you after the game. Go Flames.

Math 10

We're about 15% of the way into the NHL season, long enough to briefly revisit how many points it looks like it will take to make the playoffs.

To recap, in the '03/'04 season, 315 of 1230 (25.6%) of games were tied after regulation. The same number this season would mean 315 "extra" points spread amongst the 30 teams, since there is a 3rd point awarded in all games tied after 60 minutes. That's an average of 10.5 points per team, or put another way, the average point total this season would be 92.5.

Through 187 games so far this season, 39 have been tied after 60, or 20.9%. Extrapolated over the entire season, this amounts to 257 extra points, 8.6 per team, or an average point total of 90.6.

This is slightly interesting: roughly 20% (1 - (20.9/25.6)) fewer games this year are tied after 60. Why such a big difference?

1. More goals means a lower likelihood of a tie (this should be self-evident)
2. Fluke (small sample size)
3. Both

I'd wager the answer is (C). The increase in goal scoring we've seen thus far (~1 GPG, yes?) doesn't seem like enough to account for a 20% reduction in reg. ties (this is calculable, just not by me). It should cause some decrease, though (soccer has few goals, lots of reg ties; basketball & football have lots of points, and few reg. ties).

Anyway, the average point total for NHL teams this season should end up in the 91-92 range; if you have reason to believe otherwise, I'd love to hear why in the comments.

Math 20

For starters, if you're not familiar with the difference between mean and median, go read this brief, simple explanation.

The median team in each NHL conference is the one in 8th place: there are 7 teams ranked above it, and 7 below. The mean point total in the NHL over the past four seasons (where there was both ties and the OTL point, and 30 teams) has been roughly 86.5.

Over that same period, the eight 8th-place teams (2 per conference X 4 seasons) have had a point total higher than the mean 7 times, the '02/03 NYI being the only team to make the playoffs with a point total lower than the NHL mean.

Furthermore, the 9th-place team (ranked one below the median) has had a point total higher than the mean 4 out of 8 times. This is a mathematical way of expressing something Oilers fans know twice already: sometimes you can have an "above average" team and miss the playoffs, even though more than half of the teams make the playoffs.

Out of the admittedly small sample size of eight, the median (8th-place) team has finished an average of 3 points higher than the mean, while the 9th-place team has finished an average of 3/4 of a point below the mean.

I'll invite explanations from the readers on why this is as well. Mathematically speaking, it arises from the fact that the worst teams are statistically worse than the great teams are statistically great.

If you had to guess at the point totals for the 8th-place teams this season, you should add 3 to the expected mean, which translates to the 94-95 point range.

Math 30 & Physics 30

Colby Cosh has done us a service by bringing up binomial distribution, if only for the purpose of looking soberly at this concept called "consistency":

...the absence of ties is going to make winning and losing streaks longer as a matter of statistical course. I'm not suggesting this is relevant to the Oilers, but even a .600 hockey team whose wins are randomly distributed will lose five straight games at some point in more than half (54.3%) of its 82-game seasons.

Yes. You take a deck of 82 cards, containing 41 red and 41 black. Shuffle them up and start dealing them in a straight line. It is not bizarre to see streaks of 3, 4, 5, or even more of either colour. What would be bizarre is if you didn't see that. (And the chance of them alternating evenly is statistically negligible, on the order of your chances of winning the 6/49 three times, then being struck by lighting).

If there are more reds in the deck than blacks, then a streak of blacks less likely, but not at all unlikely or weird. This is just the way things are.

Of course, this isn't totally comforting to a fan concerned about her team's losing streak, because in the hockey version of the deck of cards, we don't know in advance how many reds and blacks are in there. (If you deal 5 straight blacks off the top of the deck, it may just be that's because it's chock full of black cards). But it should lend some perspective.

The hockey media, fans, me, etc. are always compelled to explain why, why! a team is on a roll, or struggling, or whatever. It's fun. But the fact remains that if your team's games were all settled by a coin flip, you'd see these streaks too. (And my recollection of thermodynamics is that nothing ever happens that makes the universe less disorderly, so the idea that your team's hard work ethic & leadership should reduce "inconsistency" is impossible for me to swallow).

-- End Geek Transmission

Season Record: 6-6-1	Season Record: 12-1-0
Head-to-Head: 0-0-0	Head-to-Head: 0-0-0
Last Game: 5-1 Win vs Columbus	Last Game: 4-1 Loss vs Chicago

The Oil starts out their annual hellish road trip in Detroit, where they haven't won a game since November 25, 2002. Of course, it was a heck of a long time since they won in Dallas, too.

As I predicted back here, Detroit is looking as good as they always have, although their schedule has been ridiculously soft (2 wins each vs CBJ & STL, 3 wins over CHI, and only 2 other road wins). Tonight they are looking to break their franchise record for points over the first 14 games of the season, and actually even the NHL record of 25 points currently held by the 1984-1985 Oilers, among others.

A win tonight for the Oil would be huge, and not just because it would get them to or .500 (no matter how you slice the numbers). It is pretty important to start off strong on these kind of long road trips, because if they go badly at the beginning, the hotel food gets tired quickly.

Prediction: 4-3 Oil on a terrible goal by Osgood.

The appearance of Jacques Demers in the news yesterday reminded me of one of my all-time favourite quotes:

"Being an NHL coach is kind of like being a pubic hair on a toilet seat - sooner or later, you get pissed off." - Jacques Demers

The most anguished person in Ottawa last night: Jean Chretien? No. Lindy Ruff? No. The answer is the person who had the Safeway Score & Win grand prize eligibility for the Sens game.

I actually have no idea if they do it for Sens games, but for Flames and Oilers games, they announce a person's name near the beginning of the game, and if any one player on the home team scores 5 goals, the lucky contestant wins a million bucks.

Last night the Senators' Martin Havlat potted his 4th goal with 3:02 left in the 2nd period. Then over the next 19 minutes of play, Havlat didn't score again, but Daniel Alfredsson scored 4, the last coming at 16:00.

So for the last 4:00 of the game, there were 2 players that could win Joe Sweepstakes a cool mil, and of course it didn't happen. The moral of the story, again: it's difficult to score 5 goals in an NHL game, new or old.

I almost forgot. It looks like the obits for BG might have been written a little too early.

He played great last night. Can he keep it up?

The Oiler are back to .500 after another very solid performance last night.

I've got an impending deadline, so posting will be light from me for a while.

Fortunately, Fenwick will presumably be around to cry that he still can't watch his Flames on tee-vee, and the boys over at Covered in Oil do a terrific job.

Speaking of which, I completely agree with them about Hemsky. Last night he was doing everything right that he had previously done wrong. Most impressive, was that every single time he got the puck he attacked the net. On the powerplay it was amazing - if nobody came to cover him he would shoot and get a good rebound or score, and if someone came to cover him he dumped it off perfectly for someone else. It was textbook.

If he (and the rest of the team) can keep it up, this tough extended road trip might prove to be better than expected.

For a Flames fan, definitely the 3rd most satisfying result of the year (as always, the stats at the very top left of the page are a valuable reference).

I was dismayed to see the Oil fail to fold after the dreaded "lopsided-play, tie-score" result of the 1st period; I hoped to witness that as reward for, uh, being unable to witness any other Alberta hockey. Ahh, but it is a long season, isn't it.

Postscript/Housekeeping: the Flames released their PPV plans yesterday, after 13 games. I feel like writing something snarky here, but I'm just glad that (A) there's now more games on TV, and (B) the Flames organization is now officially disqualified from ever blaming "their market" for any shortage of revenues.

Really: if they were selling 15-game PPV packages before the season started, I have no idea what they could have charged, or how many they could have sold. What I do know is that now, on November 1st, those numbers are smaller. There is a bunch of dough that is lost to the Flames (and the NHL, and the players) forever, and a bunch of fans who wanted to pay to see the team in October but wasn't permitted. Kudos, folks.

This colourful thingy to the left is a map of the Province of Alberta. You'll note, if you didn't know this already, that Lethbridge, my home since 1998, is rather far south.

In the absence of a scale, I'll tell you that Calgary is roughly 180km NNE of Lethbridge, and Edmonton is yet another 300km N. Unless you prefer undivided highways, you have to drive through Calgary to get to Edmonton from here. This is Southern Alberta.

So naturally, with Sportsnet crews covering both the Oilers and Flames games tonight, Lethbridge is being shown the Oilers game.

Except head-to-head games, I don't know that I've ever wanted the Oilers to lose as badly as I do right now. Gooooooo, C-Bus!

Clothes horses Alexandre Daigle and Wes Walz, and their Minnesota Wild teammates, visit the Saddledome tonight to take on the Flames. (Sidebar: I googled for about 15 minutes to try to find Daigle in the nurse's uni from that Score promotional campaign, and came up empty. If you know where to find it, drop a link in the comments or email me).

It's time for the boys to quit dickin' around, and exact some revenge for that ugliness on opening night in the process. Go Flames.

Season Record: 5-6-1	Season Record: 4-8-0
Head-to-Head: 0-0-0	Head-to-Head: 0-0-0
Last Game: 5-1 Win vs Preds	Last Game: 3-1 Loss vs Minnie

Whew, meetings kept me away from the computer this morning.

Anyway, I'm predicting a 4-1 win for the Oil tonight to get back to a .500 record. It still isn't enough for a playoff spot, but it is psychologically important.

In other news, Jason Bonsignore has apparently ripped the Oilers in an interview on Finnish Television. A real piece of work that guy.