I know how much Sacamano appreciates attention from the hockey wizards at Sports Illustrated, so I thought I'd flash back to a photo gallery from December, where SI called Chris Pronger the "Best Active NHL Player Without a Title":

His best chance came in 2001, when St. Louis lost to the Colorado Avalanche in five games in the Western Conference final, when the Blues were undermined by some Roman Turek goaltending so egregious that Turek appeared to be a fifth column.

I love that line. Also, this Photoshop was forwarded to me by "friend of the blog" Geoff. It's a little crude for my taste, but I thought I'd post it in honour of legendary CinO commenter "Duke".

Last but not least, James Mirtle is saying that "...the Cup is theirs to lose". I agree with that statement 100%.

ADDENDUM: This is really neither here nor there, and superstitions are what they are (i.e. nonsense, but inescapable nonsense). But does anyone else find it slightly ironic, or weird, that Jason Smith declined to touch the Clarence Campbell Bowl while wearing a Western Conference Champions hat? I always thought the idea of not touching the Bowl was roughly "this isn't what we came here to win". Sacamano is rightly the arbiter of such things, but this photo of the behatted Smith, arms held stiffly by his sides, just seems kind of, incongruous.

David Shoalts (hattip Mirtle) has confirmed my worst nightmare.

Stanley Cup Schedule:

• Game 1 - June 5
  
• Game 2 - June 7th
• Game 3 - June 10th
• Game 4 - June 12th
• Sacamano departs Edmonton for the summer
  
• Game 5 - June 14th
• Game 6 - June 17th
• Game 7 - June 19th

Don't worry you say, there will be a tee-vee where you are going, right? At the very least there will be internet, right?

Sadly, no. Fire up the ole google earth or mapquest and punch in these coordinates: 53^o05'28"N and 106^o48'44"E. Go ahead, check of all those search parameters for "bars/clubs", "lodging" "sports venues". Heck, save yourself some time and just check off "populated places".

I'm so depressed.

**Soon-to-be UFA Stephane Yelle was resigned right on the heels of Calgary's elimination from the playoffs. The Flames' news release does not disclose terms; TSN.ca says his salary for 2006/07 will be $2.8M.

I love Yelle; as such, I'm going to reserve comment on the deal until the numbers are confirmed. I HAVE to assume that the $2.8 mil is actually for the next two years, not one year.

**News-To-Me Dept. (I stopped reading the Calgary papers after the 1st round): Dion Phaneuf broke his foot in Game 80 of the regular season, and sprained his knee in Game 5 of the Anaheim series.

I think it's Dennis at IOF who has pointed out a few times than Phaneuf's raw G/A/Pts numbers, combined with his flair for the huge hit, flattered his actual value/performance in his rookie season. I'm not inclined to rebut this, exactly. (At least, I don't think he was as good an offensive defenseman this past season as you would think from a quick glance at his stats: just from memory, quite a few of his PP goals were at 5-on-3, to boot).

That said, I'm relieved to learn that he was hurt, because he looked pretty weak in the playoffs. I don't agree with Dennis that Phaneuf was basically a 5th/6th defenseman with some gaudy PP stats. He really was very good this season, and I think the bodychecking aspect of his game was overblown (in a Monster way, so to speak). His play in transition, going both directions, was exactly what you want to see from a presumptive Norris candidate going forward. He makes plays, I don't know of a better way to put it. Hopefully next postseason, being a little older, a little wiser, and a little healthier, he'll be a lot better.

**Good to see Peter Maher headed to the Hockey Hall of Fame. The timing is perfect, I'd say: he's got another 2-3 good years before Bob Cole Disease sets in and becomes irreversible. He's just what you want from a home broadcaster. I've said this before at least once: there is nothing wrong or shameful about a broadcaster "cheering" for one team; the problem is only if/when his bias affects his ability to give a decently accurate account of what's going on. Maher is good this way; if the opponent scores because so-and-so missed a backchecking assignment, I hear about it (instead of, say, a rehashing of the last call/non-call that didn't go the Flames' way).

**Where Do The Flames Go From Here is a topic for the offseason, but for a hint of the way I'm thinking, check out Tyler's commentary on this season's Panthers:

Playing a game that has a ton of shots each way is a point in their favour -- the bigger the role played by the goaltender, the better the chance that Florida is going to win the game.

Of course. It's hard to call the Flames #27 Rank in Goals For this season simply a personnel issue: they were T-11th in PP%. Flames fans have been drilled that the team "can't win by trading scoring chances", but I don't know that this is actually true: with a Top 3 NHL goalie and a pretty talented D-corps, "trading chances" should work in the Flames favour more often than not. (Further "data" points: they did come back from 1 and 2-goal deficits frequently this season, and the two 6-5 games of the season were both wins).

You don't turn a team's identity inside-out in one offseason, nor would you want to, but there's some things to think about here. Anyway, more on this another day.

We've all got a week off to actually get things accomplished at work in order to make up for all the time we have wasted spent over the last three weeks sending scathing letters to CBC, cruching spreadsheets to show that Dvorak kicks ass, frantically analyzing shift charts, recovering from hangovers, lighting bonfires in shopping carts, getting treated for electrical burns on our hands, etc.

But in the meantime, anyone know anything at all about either Carolina or Buffalo? This unbalanced schedule has ensured that I know next to nothing about either of them.

On paper it looks like the Oil matchup best against Buffalo, because then we can employ the taunting animal metaphors that have worked so well in the last two series -- three if you count octopus.

On the other hand, I really like those Hurricanes bloggers (Red and Black Hockey, Cason, Sweet Tea, Barbecue, and Body Checks, Hokejowy Blog, and, naturally, Ronnie Franchise.

I get the sense that those folks can give it as well as they can take it. Especially that Acid Queen -- she frightens me a little bit.

I'm going to spend the week reading those guys so that I can exploit their weaknesses come Saturday, or whenever this shindig actually kicks off.

Hey, blame me if you want. Blame the refs if you want. Blame the Norwalk Virus, or whatever it was that caused Raffi to lose 12 pounds and Horcoff to burst blood vessels in his eyeball from throwing up so violently.

Me, I blame the players.

You can only have mediocre games for so long and expect to keep on winning. Fact is, they probably didn't deserve to be up 3-0 in the first place, and the whole strategy of only playing for 10 or 12 minutes/game can't work all the time.

Most frustrating part -- our 5 on 3's. Man are the Oilers terrible at 5 on 3's. The only option they look for is the one-timer from the top. Here they have Samsonov and Horcoff down low-- two pretty creative guys around the net-- and those three jokers Stoll, Pronger, and Bergeron play keep away around the horn for 45 seconds.

Still, I'm with Lowetide. Things are looking up again. The Oil are at their best when they need to be at their best, and I'm thinking that they win in Anaheim. Or back in Edmonton. Or back in Anaheim.

Right? Right? It's not time to panic yet, right? Right?

Good news, folks, we can start to wear our Oilers sweaters to work! I know I've been holding off, but now that Mayor Mandel has put it into writing, hell, I might wear only my sweater to work.

Mac-T has promised some fresh legs for this game, including playing Murray/LeGG/Petersen more. I'm not exactly sure who else he had in mind. Maybe D-vo is back. Or Ullie. God forbid they put in Schremp -- the HF message board might explode.


The Ducks--and others--are all a titter about LeGG mugging for the camera. As a "Live by the Unwritten Fighters Code" kinda guy, it was somewhat out of character for Georges, but hey, it's playoffs. And, to be fair, the Ducks game plan--led by Ole Granite Todd Marchant--was to come out and try to intimidate the Oilers by running Roli**, etc. They deserved a little smack down for that kind of punk playing, and they deserved a little mocking for thinking that Teemu could physically intimidate anyone on the Oilers. Andy crushes the notion that it was Georges' actions that sparked the Ducks' comeback. I actually think it might have been a bit of a mistake for Mac-T to call out Georges for that -- a passive Georges is a useless Georges.

Mirtle links to a few nice article -- one on Pisani and one on the Boys on the Bus calling home. I think it is a bit early for this nostalgia talk -- that, more than anything, has been shown to kill the Oilers (think Heritage Classic, Sweater Retirements, Banner Raisings, etc.).

Anyway, I thinking the Ducks will come out the same way as they did last game. The first period will features lots of penalties and a few fights, but it is the Oiler's powerplay that will take advantage. Tonight's game will be a blowout. The Oil will get something like 5 or 6 goals.

Sacamano's Key to the Game:

• Stan Weir, and his stinky eye
• Keep your eyes on the prize of a few days extra R&R time
  

Prediction: 4-2 Oil (Bergeron, Dvorak, Smyth, Peca empty netter).

* Am I the only one who didn't know that the opposition's true name is not 'The Anaheim Mighty Ducks', but in fact 'The Mighty Ducks of Anaheim'? That actually sounds better for some reason.

**Since we're talking terminology, occasional commentor and self-professed "die-hard Roloson fan" Courtney pointed out that the preferred spelling is 'Roli' not "Rollie" as evidenced by his mask. Interestingly, the Sun seems to go with 'Rolie' to fit with goalie.

One of the common bonds between most longtime serious NHL fans is nostalgia for the old non-geographic Division names. For you utes: in the pre-Bettman days, the two conferences were the Wales Conference and the Campbell Conference, and the four divisions were the Adams, Patrick, Norris, and Smythe Divisions. The first four Battles of Alberta were Smythe Division Finals. Chris Berman used to refer to the NFC Central Division (before the NFL realigned to 8 divisions) as the NFC Norris, on account of the membership of Chicago, Minnesota, and Detroit.

The change, as I understand it, was part of an effort to broaden hockey's appeal, the thought being that these weird division names might be a barrier for new fans. I thought this was wrong then, and I still do: the NHL's unique aspects are, on balance, a selling point. (The Stanley Cup is still widely regarded as the most coveted trophy in all of sports; some of its cachet would certainly be lost if it was renamed the NHL Championship Trophy.)

Anyway, all that aside: if the league were to go back to Adams, Patrick, Norris, and Smythe, there's still the matter of two extra divisions to name. What to call them?

The most natural fit, I'd think, is to name them after legends of the Montreal Canadiens and the Boston Bruins. The namesakes of the four divisions above were coaches/builders mostly associated with Detroit, New York, Chicago, and Toronto, respectively; it seems right to pay tribute to the remaining two Original Six franchises with the remaining two division names. Perhaps the Art Ross Division and the Toe Blake Division.

The nearly equally appealing alternative would be to name them after more contemporary legends; here I'd suggest the Bowman and Neilson Divisions.

However it went, this would be a great idea. The naming would be no more nonsensical than having Dallas in the Pacific Division (distance from Dallas to LA: 1,400 miles). Suggestions?

Now that was a crazy hockey game. Fantastic! I think, Earl, that you can safely stop worrying about the watchability of this series. It had it all - hitting, scoring, fighting . . . That was epic. Epic.

Talk about your range of emotions. Kudos to the Ducks for not hitting the surf after the Oil went up 4-0 -- some of those guys were definitely looking shell-shocked on the bench. When LeGG threw his arms in the air it sounded like an earthquake -- and that was just in my apartment building. I can only imagine what it must have been like in Rexall.

But after that, it was the Oilers turn to start skating around like idiots. Holy cow. I guess we should have expected that the Ducks would wake up at some point -- they were flying out there.

Stevie with a goal (have you seen a guy that excited!). Fernie with another clutch goal. Paul letting the crowd sing 'Oh Canada' -- including a close-up shot of Joey Moss just ripping it out. Wow. Has Peca earned his salary yet?

My gawd, I'm not sure what to say. I have to decompress. That was crazy.

There is currently a horrific thread over at HF in which self-proclaimed "True Oilers Fans" are trying to one-up each other in terms of their relative levels of fandom (usually with reference to how much money they spend, beer they drink, posts they make, etc.). I've been meaning to smack them down for a while, but I wanted to find some way to demonstrate what "true fandom" is all about.

And then, out of the blue, astute reader -- let's call him 'Darren' -- pointed me to some simply spectacular fandom over in the forums at flyangler.ca.

Check out these incredible presentation flies tied by some anglers to show their team spirit. I absolutely love them -- I actually had no idea that flies could be so beautiful. I could even see myself getting into this kind of thing if only it didn't eventually require standing in cold water for hours on end.




A Copper and Blue Oilers fly by pacres



















A Flames fly by sanjuanworm















An Oilers fly by sanjuanworm after his conversion from the Flames.

Allan Maki reports from Edmonton that:

• Dvorak is getting close to returning, which will significantly help his chances of scoring a goal
• Ulanov was mentioned as a possibility -- maybe the Prez's letter writing campaign finally scored results
• Samsonov and Moreau didn't skate this morning, and Torres, at least, is still outwith the flu
  
• Whyte Avenue bars are running "dangerously low" on beer.
  

Wow, with the holiday yesterday (Cheers to the Queen!) this game really snuck up on me. I think we could all use another day off Mr. Bettman.

Torres and Bergy are apparently back, but Smith and perhaps Horc are out (he says writing at 7:00 am before any game day reports have come out).

I dunno; what's to say about tonight's game? At no point in this series has my blood pressure risen above a cool 90/50 mmHg. Mike w summed it up exactly:

It's the Orbs of Power effect, that even with total puck control domination I never felt really all that worried, miles away from the pure distilled fear of the Detroit series.

It's almost like the Oilers fans are in a holding pattern. Oh sure, outwardly some people are still maintaining that we can't look ahead; but I don't know anyone who hasn't (at least inwardly) already forgotten about the Ducks. Is this dangerous? Meh, I'll take my chances.

The fact is, I don't only want, I need a quick series. In fact, I need two quick series because on June 14th I leave the country. It would just about kill me if the Oiler won the Stanley Cup and the biggest party in Edmonton in over a decade happened two blocks away from my house -- and I wasn't there. It is for this reason alone that I still have my ever-growing playoff beard -- not because the Oilers need the love of the Hockey Gods, but because I do.

I'm thinking that the crowd propells the Oil to a quick start, and they go into the second up 2-1. Each team will score one in the second, and the Oil will turn the gas back on in the third.

Sacamano's Key to the Game:

• Stan Weir, and his beer

Prediction: 4-2 Oil (Dvorak, Ken Lowe, Dr. John Clarke, Roloson).

Not the Oil's best game--they went back to that horrific defend the lead strategy, which invariably results in them being badly outplayed for long periods--but I'll take it. Especially if this is the best we can expect from the Ducks in what was a damn-close-to-must-win game for them. Oh, yeah, and I suppose the fact that half the team had the flu was a factor.

Rollie was solid again and is on a two game point streak. He also tied Grant Fuhr's Oilers record for career playoff penalty minutes -- and in only 14 games (it took Grant 111 games). I think it is a bit much, however, to claim that he has stolen either of the last two games, which seems to be a common theme on the highlight shows I've seen.

The noise from Whyte is much more subdued tonight, despite the fact that it is a holiday. Perhaps Joe Fan has also come to the conclusion that an Oilers Stanley Cup is inevitable and so wants to save his cash for the Stampede the finals.

I only want to comment on a few items tonight:

Fernando Pisani
Much has already been made of local boy Pisani livin' the dream; but I think Horcoff nailed it when he said of Pisani: "Let's be honest, the guy's a machine . . . Give him a chance to score and he'll do it." Going into the game Pisani was fourth in the league in post-season shooting percentage at 38.9%, despite having only one fewer goal than the three people above him combined. Tonight he scored another beauty with a no-backswing quick release wrister to the top corner.

The Flu
The Oilers training staff has to nip this in the bud. I was shocked as hell to hear that Torres and Bergy were going to be flying home with the rest of the team tonight. From everything I've ever learned about communicable diseases, sitting on an airplane with its recirculated air is a guaranteed way to help the thing along. I'd have sent those two guys back on some commercial airline -- preferably the one the Ducks are taking. Or is flu one of those ones that is only contagious before outward symptoms show themselves? I still wouldn't risk it.

D-Zone Breakouts
The Oilers have totally solved a problem that has irritated me all season -- the blind fire around the boards in the d-zone. For the entire season the Oil would try to clear the puck by just shooting it around the boards and, invariably, it would be picked off by someone who had been standing there the entire time. Now the d-men are taking a look and, more often than not, are making the extra little pass D to D or to the forwards in the middle for the chip outs. It's fantastic.

Ilia
Did I see some frustration by Bryz after he totally missed that first goal? He was looking at his blocker like it was made of swiss cheese. Do they have the option to go back to Giggy? I hope so, not because I actually want to face Giggy -- I think he is the better goaltender -- but because I want the Ducks players to have to think about it.

Goilers! Playoff Beard Pennants.
Check em out -- sooooo cool!

The Edmonton Oilers official homepage has a suprisingly excellent Game Day Centre. If you haven't been checking it out, you really should.

In particular, the Lineup & Game Notes link gives you a 20 page pdf on Oilers Notes with tonnes of fun information on all of the Oil's previous 2006 playoff games, historical records in any scenario imaginable (when winning game 1, when losing game 1, when leading a series 2-0, etc.), and dozens of fantastic little tidbits (especially in the Noteworthy section on page 4). The links at the top also give you pdf docs of Ducks Notes, Game by Game, Oilers Players, Oilers Goalies, Ducks Goalies, Ducks Players.

The Oilers Notes informs us that Oilers players have broken a number of team and league records this playoff season:

• In Rollie's first ever playoff game in Oilers silks he set two team records -- 54 saves and 57 shots against. Salo held the old record of 56 shots and 53 saves vs Dallas in 1999.
  
  
• Rollie has 12 PIM this playoff season which has already doubled the previous single year high of 6 by Fuhr in 1988. In fact, Rollie is just one minor penalty away from breaking Fuhr's career record of 14 PIM in 111 playoff games with Edmonton. You can do it Rollie!
  
  
• Pronger tied the Oilers and NHL records for most assists in a period, with three in the second period of the Oilers 3-2 win vs Detroit. He joins Gretzky, Coffey, Gregg, Anderson, Messier, and Tikkanen.
  
  
• The Oilers set a team record with 58 shots against in the OT win vs San Jose The previous high was 544 vs Winnipeg in 1984.

First off, thanks again to the Sports Matters fellas for hosting a few of us for Game 1. Good times. We'll have to do it again sometime when the entire Oilogosphere is available.

I'm looking forward to this game. The Oilers have demonstrated that they can win after being down at the start of a series (one or two games); but they haven't yet had the opportunity to throttle a team right from the start. Tonight's game will be a great test of that elusive killer instinct.

Tonight should also -- in theory -- bring out the best of the Ducks, so I'm anticipating a better game than Game 1, which was pretty sloppy.

Part of the problem, apparently, is that it is ice that's more conducive for figure skating. It decomposes with all the pressure hockey players put on it.

Yep, I'd say that's a problem alright.

As predicted, MC has crunched the numbers and likes what he sees. IOF also has an interesting post up on Selanne and on Carlyle's crazy shift patterns. I know that I give these guys occassional grief for their heartless statistical evaluations; but man they do excellent work. Before MC I never looked too carefully at goal differential, and before IOF I sure as hell never paid more than passing attention to shift patterns -- now I find myself making crazy spreadsheets and watching hockey games with my laptop open to the NHL shift charts. I swear I've had a few games where I spent more time looking at my monitor than the tee-vee. Weird.

Pre-Game Laffs:

• "I think there are a lot of players Pronger doesn't like, not just me. I've watched the other games on TV and I think he has a problem with everybody" -- Teemu Selanne
• "I don't think Mike Peca likes me, either. His first year in the league, when he was in Vancouver, and I was with the Jets, he hit me in the open ice and he knocked me out" -- Teemu Selanne
• "I hate every goalie in the league" -- Teemu Selanne
• "During the Olympics, I saw this Finnish paper with a big picture of Miikka, laying on a beach in Hawaii. That was the treatment he said he needed?" -- Teemu Selanne
  
• "I think we can wear them down, even a guy like Pronger, who plays 32 minutes a night. You hit him six, seven or eight times, it can be a long series" -- Lupul said.
• I was a little dizzy, so I didn't even think about celebrating" -- Ales Hemsky after scoring in Game 1
• "A fan in the lower bowl Friday night was spotted wearing a Calgary Flames jersey with an Oilers logo taped to the front. "

That last one made me feel all warm and fuzzy inside from all the luv flowing up the ole QE2. Speaking of which, thanks to the Fenwicks for coming up from sunny L.A. (Lethbridge, Alberta) to watch the Oilers roll over the team that ousted the Flames. I hope you got your photos taken beside the old City of Champions sign on your way out off town, because in a few weeks it will have bookends.

Fun Stat of the Day:

• In his 27 playoff appearances, Rollie has only allowed more than three goals twice.
  

Sacamano's Key to the Game:

• Stan Weir, mountain man.
  

Prediction: 4-2 Oil (Smyth, Pisani, Horcoff, Dvorak).

At 16:31 of the first period, it was agreed by all in the room that this series is over.

I'm thinking Cosh was right -- it's gonna be a sweep.

Did anyone, at anytime feel even remotely worried that the Oil would lose this game?

I can't say I know too much about these Mighty Ducks, except that Selanne seems to have found his groove again, and like the Sharks they are apparently relying on a wet behind the ears backup goaltender. Earl Sleeke has also found his groove over at the Battle of California, and he is providing some 'Meet your Mighty Ducks' vignettes -- presumably because people in California don't know anything about their team either.

Much has been made about young Bryzgalov's jocularity in the locker room; but the fact is, it is easy to be loose when your team is winning. I'm guessing that at the first sign of trouble (i.e., Ryan Smyth's moolay all up in his grill), his jock will tighten considerably. Sometimes it just takes a little bit of time for these young pups to realize that they are actually playing for some important marbles -- and once that bulb goes on, it's hard to turn it off again. If he has a weak first or second outing, Anaheim will have a full on goaltending controversy just like Oilers fans enjoyed watching in Detroit and San Jose. Besides, the crack Oilers scouting staff has been watching this guy and will have identified his quirks.

I'm sure that Madcrutch and IOF will crunch the rest of the numbers, but Andy has identified three figures that stick out for me:

• 1998-1999. That's the last time Anaheim won a game in Edmonton
• 4-0-0. That's Edmonton's record against the Ducks this season.
• 14-2. That's Edmonton's record against the Ducks for the last 4 seasons
  

Sacamano's Key to the Game:

• Muffle Selanne and crash Bryzgalov.
• Stan Weir, the mighty, mighty river.
• Wikipedia: They've already crowned the Oil champions (hattip anonymous). It's okay, Grabia, we can talk about it now.
  

Prediction: 4-2 Oil (Dvorak, Bergeron, Pisani x 2).

mc79hockey.com:

Watching Ales Hemsky in the defensive zone is like watching that scene in Animal House where Pinto is smoking the joint with Donald Sutherland. He doesn't really know what he's doing but the older people he looks up (Sutherland, Boone and Boone's girlfriend) are doing it and he doesn't want to look uncool so he goes along with it. Hemsky threw yet another awkward looking defensive zone bodycheck last night, something that's been commented on as this series went along. That shot block in G3 though...that was like if Pinto from Animal House had said "Joints are for children" and then injected heroin into his eye. Good stuff.

I don't have the gut feeling -- or the guts -- to make a prediction on Ducks-Oilers. My rough sense, based on season- and playoffs-to-date, is that the Oilers' Best is probably better than the Ducks' Best, but that in any given game you're more liable to see the latter than the former.

What I would most like to see, without a doubt, is a split of the first two in Anaheim; a split of the next two in Edmonton; a narrow win by the Ducks in Game 5; and an embarrassing home loss in Game 6 to concede the series, where the Oil is beaten handily at both ends and is never really in the game. Is this probable? No, but if you don't think it's plausible, then you haven't really followed the Oil's fortunes this year.

I'm actually going to be joining Sacamano and a host of bearded others in Edmonton tomorrow night to take in Bob & Harry's call of Game 1. So if the hockey gods would like to arrange that split so that it's Game 2 that the Oilers win, boy, that'd be swell.

Latest in a series of things I don't know if I should be saying out loud, since I don't know if it's jinx or anti-jinx: the Oilers may be tabbed by the Hockey Gods to win the Stanley Cup. Every previous time the Flames have made the Cup Finals, the Oilers have won the Cup the following season. The Flames made the Finals in '86; Oilers won the Cup in '87. Flames made the Finals in '89; Oilers won the Cup in '90. Flames made the Finals in '04; Oilers... ???

(There's similar voodoo at play, with a larger sample size, when the Flames and Canucks meet in the 1st round. The winner of that series, whenever it has happened ('82, '89, '94, '04), has gone on to the Finals.)

Per the roadtrip plans noted above, I doubt I'll be posting anything here until at least Monday, which means over the long weekend, this site will become even more lousy with Oiler fans than it already is. Hazard of the Battle, I guess.

SINCERITY WARNING: Proceed with caution

I got a kick out of mike w's postgame piece. Excellent stuff. No one excerpt can get this across, but the theme is one of elation and "You Don't Know How It Feels". That's what made me smile. This comment is neither sarcastic nor sniffy: what is happening in Edmonton right now is exactly -- exactly -- what happened in Calgary in 2004, the most obvious (and fun) feature being an entire generation of both brand-new and decade-long-suffering fans experiencing their first run.

I happened to be at the Game 6 clincher against San Jose. Not the one yesterday, the one two years ago. And watching the 3rd period of last night's game, I had an intense feeling of deja-vu. As the series win became more and more inevitable as time ticked away, the crowd became constantly loud. There were still swells, but that base racket never went away. As the final seconds ticked away, it got louder and louder, to the point where it sounds like that's as loud as it can get. But when the horn finally went, there was another abrupt and HUGE jump in crowd noise. Watch the highlights! I would have had trouble believing it myself, if I hadn't been in the identical situation 24 months ago.

All season, the occasional jibe or insult was lobbed my way about both the bandwagon Calgary fans and our unseemly pleasure at a lesser result than the Stanley Cup. I never really engaged those taunts, and this is why. The bandwagon is one of the things that makes a playoff run exciting. It's got-dang hard to win playoff series; right now, there's 26 NHL teams filled (mostly) with players who wanted it just as bad as the Oilers players, and they're sitting at home with knots in their stomachs.

I won't be climbing on the "Covered" bandwagon myself, even for free coffee. But nor will I be scoffing at Oiler fans for their excitement (err, at least the non-armed ones). This shit is FUN; you gotta own it.

Semi-related postscript: Steve Simmons and Greg Millen aside, the most irritated I got all season at someone in the hockey media was at Grant Pollock, the Calgary Global Sports veteran. The day of the home opener in October, he went on the tube imploring Flames fans to sit on their hands while the Western Conference Championship banner was raised. It wasn't just "I'm not impressed by making the Cup finals", which is dubious enough, it was, "You shouldn't be either!" I gave his broadcast image the proverbial instruction to attempt an anatomically impossible sexual act. I assume my sentiments then are somewhat understandable to Oiler fans now.

Post-postscript: Regardless of where the Oil ends up, if you thought Edmonton was psyched before this season, with Pronger and Peca and the New Era, you ain't seen nothin' yet.

Sounds like there were some idiots down on the Ave last night; but this made me laugh for quite a while:

One young woman popped out of the sunroof of a stretch limousine to bare her breasts. At the next red light, the limo driver got out and mooned passersby on the sidewalk.

I can see why rhuck was so averse to the his Flames advancing deep into playoffs. This totally sucks.

Quick Thoughts:

• Do we get to keep Hughson or are Bob and Harry the default #1 team?
  
  
• Oh sure, we all talk a big game; but I think that this team might be even better than any of us dared believe. Bringing down the hammer two Game 6's in a row -- that's something. And winning 4 straight games after being spanked so hard during the first two? I didn't think they had it in them -- now I think that we can shoot for the moon.
  
  
• There is no team remaining that the Oilers can't beat in a 7-game series. Read that again.
  
  
• Given that Peca shaved his beard and played his best game of the season, I think we can all safely shave whenever the hell we want. This is good news, because I'm not sure how much longer I can keep this thing if the temperature continues to break 30.
  
  
• Am I crazy, or is there not a single blog dedicated to the Ducks. Could it have something to do with the fact that playoff games -- including last night's game -- aren't televised down there?
  
  
• Is it possible for Thornton to still win the Hart? What a travesty that would be.
  
  
• Friday? The next round starts on Friday? The Oil have played more games than any of the remaining teams, have had the worst travel schedule, the most afternoon games, and have had a couple of marathon overtimes. It would sure be nice if the Oil could steal that first game in Anaheim while running on emotion, because you've got to think that their legs will start to go at some point. Well, except for Moreau and Horcoff -- those guys are freaks.
  
  
• Both Cosh and Mirtle have nice writeups of Rollie-- I was shocked that tonight was his first ever playoff shutout. I loved how in his post-game interview when Oake asked him if he was playing the best hockey of his career, Rollie said "No, this is how I play. This is how I played in Minnesota . . ." and then shrugged and said he was having fun. I love this guy.
  

Time to hunt some duck.

The Oil has an awesome opportunity tonight to move into the NHL's Final Four, in front of the raucous home crowd. One can only hope that today's Oiler players take a hard look up at the rafters -- preferably during a lengthy pre-game interval from the comfort of the players' bench -- and gain some inspiration from the proof of success hanging there.



Add in the accumulated heart, guts, knowing-how-to-win, and 17 Stanley Cup rings of Lowe, Mac-T, Huddy, and Simpson, and how can they lose?

UPDATE: Cosh has photos from today's parade"support rally", which if nothing else demonstrate the upside of 30-degree weather for playoff hockey. He's characterizing it as a positive karmic development; who on earth am I to argue? The chances of the Oilers getting their "One more win" looks good.

Before talking hockey, I need to get a few things out of the way.

First, anthem booing in the context of sporting events is lame. Fronting an amnesiac holier than thou attitude about anthem booing is even more lame. Let it go, people.

Second, it would appear that my single post on playoff beards has -- in some people's eyes -- elevated me to the status of Playoff Beard Guru. I've actually received more than one email imploring me to intervene in Chris!'s decision to shave (or not). [UPDATE: the decision is in-- the beard stays]

Look, if dude wants to shave, dude's gonna shave, and it seems highly unlikely that this will have any impact on the result of the game--of course I'm not ruling out the potential for said impact. This is not to say that I apologize in any way for giving him (or Grabia) the gears over it. As Cosh noted in a comment section: "Why grow it, document it lovingly, turn it into an international celebrity that gets its own fan mail, boast that it's responsible for the team's success, and then threaten to shave it?" That kind of audacity certainly deserves, nay requires, some sort of mocking. Plus, I kinda feel like one of those Dharma Initiative white coats -- "how long can we actually keep this monkey dancing by telling him that his work is gravely important--especially given that he has never met any of us. Bwa-ha-ha-ha." [UPDATE: The monkey keeps dancing!]

All I'm saying is that, while Chris!'s beard has provided a welcome and amusing distraction during the two days off, it is now time to focus on more important issues, like figuring out the best way to flip cars on Whyte Avenue without spilling your beer, and establishing exactly where on the All-Time Athlete Baby Scale Joe Thornton ranks for wussing his way off to the dressing room with 113 seconds remaining in the last game (pretty damn high, is what I'd say).

Sacamano's Keys to the Game:

• First goal. If the Oil get one, or even better two, early goals, the Sharks are going to pack their bags and go home. If the Sharks score first, we've got ourselves a game;
• Rib pain. Which team is most likley to have pulled an intercostal laughing at Ron Wilson's suggestion that the pressure is now on the Oilers?
  
• Global Climate Change. 31 Celsius tomorrow. 31!? That can't be good for the ice conditions;
• Nepotism: The Oilers Alumni are rumoured to have successfully wrapped another tentacle around the Edmonton hockey scene as Bucky's back in town. This can't hurt, right? It's not like he's coaching our powerplay or anything;
  
• Chris!'s playoff beard. Sorry dude, but I'm not entirely willing to risk displeasing the Hockey Gods by failing to at least mention your potential blasphemy; and, of course,
• Stan Weir's Mojo.
  

Prediction: 4-2 Oil (Stoll, Hemsky, Pronger, D-vo with the empty netter)

Quotes of the Day:

• "I don't need any brain doctors to handle this type of situation," Toskala said. "It's going to be fine."
• "I figure they're bringing in the closer" -- Todd Harvey on his insertion into the top line for tonight's game
  

In addition to the usual gameday tailgate party at Rexall, there will be an Edmonton Oilers Fan Vehicle Parade at noon.

Here are the details I received in an email through the Oilers Pipeline:

. . . the Edmonton Oilers will parade a number of local vehicles that have been ‘Oiler-ized’ for the playoffs from Rexall Place to City Hall.

The parade will feature the artistic creations of numerous Oilers fans who have painted their vehicles in team colors, erected oil derricks in the back of their trucks, and are proud to show their support of the Oilers everywhere they go.

The vehicles will gather at Rexall Place beginning at 11:00 a.m., and will set out on the parade route at 12:00 Noon. The parade route will travel from Rexall Place down Wayne Gretzky Drive, before turning right onto 112th Avenue, and left on 82nd Street. The procession will then follow Jasper Avenue to 108th Street, before turning right to 102nd Avenue. The final stop will be in front of City Hall, where the vehicles will be briefly displayed for Oilers fans.

Oilers fans are encouraged to line the parade route during the lunch hour, and show their support . . .

Judging by some of the ‘Oiler-ized’ jalopies I've seen cruising around town, my guess is that there are going to be some pretty darn funny rigs in this parade.

(UPDATED)

Breathlessly monitored subplot of the week: Kristine, girlfriend of Chris!, is visiting him in Toronto, and may or may not be encouraging him to shave off his playoff beard. Not surprisingly, the reaction from Chris' fellow Oiler fans is ranging roughly from "Dump her" to "Keep it, even if she dumps you" The delightful cherry on top of this non-controversy, though, comes from the lovely Kristine's Guest Appearance at CinO in February:

...what really got me into hockey was not, in fact, being disappointed time after time watching the Oilers get their asses kicked by Minnesota, believe it or not, but the—wait for it—Calgary Flames in the playoffs two years ago. Yes, I’m one of those fans.

Developing!

UPDATE: Now that my role has essentially been reduced to shit-disturber around here, I might as well say that I'll also be squinting to see if Chris! does in fact shave his beard, but pretends otherwise to avoid the wrath of the Oilogosphere. Stage 4 Beard Growth is tough to monitor: will Chris! spend this evening changing shirts, mussing up his hair, and taking multiple photographs of himself for future Beardwatch entries?

The only way to avoid such slanders will be to give Robocop some company in the background: the Today's Newspaper proof, perhaps?

I'm still down in Calgary, and I've gotta say, I love this town. It is chalk full of Oilers fans. When I first arrived on Friday, I turned on my folks' tv, which is approximately the size of a cell phone screen and needs at least 20 minutes to warm up, and the first person I saw through my binoculars was Astrid Kuhn -- the Calgary CBC reporter -- wearing an Oilers sweater. "I just thought it was time to cheer for the Alberta team", she said. Beautiful.

Apparently, like rhuck, most of the city wasn't really interested in cheering for the Flames anyway -- they were just biding their time until the team from the City of Champions could make their run.

I have no comments about the previous game that hasn't already been made by everyone else.

Tonight's game should be a ring a ding dong dandy, to quote another Calgarian who probaby would have been cheering on the Oil, rest his soul.

You have to think that the Sharks are a wee bit rattled. Their coach stupidly yanked their goaltender for . . . what exactly . . . playing behind a soft D? And they can't be happy about the possibility of losing tonight and having to face bedlam at Rexall in a potential series clincher.

Sacamano's Key to the Game: only one key today -- Stan Weir and his Mother

Prediction: 4-2 Oil (D-vo x 2, Torres, Bergeron).

Great stuff in this morning's Edmonton Sun. You gotta love sports fans: they're lunatics.

One fan carried a stuffed shark atop an imitation harpoon - the shark had been dunked in real motor oil.

"It's messy, but it gets the message across," said the young man, calling himself only the Shark Slayer.

Not too sure the message that gets across is the one HE thinks is getting across, but no matter.

Also, great hed here:

LUBRICATED!
Oiler fans take celebration to the street on Whyte

As the veteran scribe Anna cracked in the terrific but generally overlooked ensemble flick The Paper, "Oh yeah, god forbid this paper ever runs anything without an exclamation point."

NON-HOCKEY RELATED ADDENDUM: This is also a fantastic headline, on the story of the Blue Bombers signing Onterrio Smith to a contract:

Blue Bombers ink NFL "Whizz" kid

Hee hee...

That's gotta be a question on the minds of quite a few Sharks and Oilers fans. He won the Art Ross Trophy this season, and is a Hart nominee too, yet he's chalked up a mere 1-5-6 (-2) on 2006 playoff scoresheets.

I've never been much of a fan. For all his mad skillz, he's been a disappointment in the playoffs his whole career, and no one was raving about him at the Olympics either. But, hell, I'm just a mediocre writer who posts on a hockey website during procrastination time. For a more articulate take, the struggles and limitations of Thornton have been chronicled impressively and frequently by professional sports writer, all-star BofA commenter, and Oil SuperFan Colby Cosh. Let's go through a sampling.

May 2003:

You compare the [2002 Olympic] team Gretzky picked for Canada, and you see there's talent at every age level--especially if he'd picked Joe Thornton. (Gretz was given merry hell for leaving him off, but all has been forgiven. In fact, Thornton stayed home from the worlds, perhaps still in a snit over his Olympic non-selection. It's starting to look like the guy may be Canada's personal good-luck charm as long as he stays the hell away from the national side.)

April 2004:

I never imagined that the Habs could be out-imploded, but everything that's being written about the Bruins is true: they played worse with each consecutive chance to eliminate Montreal, and Thornton's gutless display should cost him the captaincy. His lack of mobility is excusable, but his whining to the refs, his visible indifference to the outcome of the game, and his fear of the puck in the offensive zone are not.

December 2005:

>>I feel sorry for all Bruins fans, I cann't believe it Joe Thornton Joe Thornton

I think that last guy just got a good start on a folk song. "Where have you gone, Joe Thornton, Joe Thornton? Where have you gone, our pillow-soft boy?" My take on the trade is in this BoA thread.

That'd be this one:

[...]Point two: Thornton is obviously kind of a jagoff. I do think Boston would have been distinctly better off without him in the playoffs "last year." Yeah, fine, he was hurt (inchoately). We've all seen Doug Weight and Steve Yzerman set the tone despite being hurt. Every facial expression and gesture on Thornton was screaming "We give up" in that Montreal series.

And a little further down:

It's bullshit. Everybody knew at the time that Thornton was hurt--and nobody who was actually watching the series thought it excused him losing his stick and tackling Zednik, repeatedly whining to the refs with the play still live, dodging the puck in the Habs' zone, ostentatiously giving up when his team got behind, and hiding from the media when his teammates were working overtime every day trying to defend him.

Finally, an excellent Western Standard column from that same month, "A Reluctant Superstar" (read the whole thing):

Thornton exemplifies a universal rule of sports: a player possessing an overwhelming talent will always be the de facto leader of his team and will always be held to account for its failings. This is true no matter how well that player performs. [...]

Even before that [Montreal] series, Thornton sometimes had trouble fitting the heavy garb of a superstar. It took him three years to shake the initial suspicion that he would end up as an overhyped bust. He would sometimes try to establish his bona fides by picking fights he couldn't win or by dirty stickwork, costing himself ice time and stumbling over the fine line between guts and stupidity. A couple of years ago he even threatened to retire after an evening of rough handling by the opposition.

And he's always been a little graceless with the media. On the evening of the trade, I heard him on the radio whining sarcastically--literally whining, talking through his nose like a spoiled kid. "I've been consistent all year and scored a point a game almost, I think, but I guess that's not good enough," Thornton told the reporters. "I guess getting rid of me was the answer."

I have to believe that one of these days (years?), Joe will turn in a dynamite playoff performance in spite of himself. Will it come before he's commonly known as Thornton Manning, c/w his own Face? (The Joe Thornton Face is the one you see after a bad loss that says, "That was a tough loss, but at least I still have my millions of dollars and my supermodel girlfriend.") I haven't the faintest idea.

I think Chopper speaks for all Oil fans when he says:

It would be more enjoyable if we were up in the series," said Moreau. "But I love this hockey - it's great, it's fast, it's physical. It's a great product. It's two teams that are competing very hard, two teams that skate well.

True dat.

I have no grand observations other than I think that the winner of this game will win the series.

Other random stuff:

As Shaye Gannon pointed out on this morning's Global News, Ryan Smyth ain't so tough. When Jason Smith requires stitches, he refuses to even leave the bench. Now, that's tough. And don't even get me started about how tough Stan Weir is.

Ron Wilson also pointed out that Smytty is "nothing special." "We have had plenty of guys get their teeth knocked out in major situations and come back" Some other amusing Wilson highlights:

• "There's absolutely no way the Oilers can play better than they did last night"
  
• "Dwayne Roloson is a genius in manipulating the referees into thinking he's being interfered with, when their guys are piling on our goalie at our end''
  
• When asked if his guys would be tired after the triple OT game: “What do you think? Seriously,’’ Wilson responded. “I mean, they're out running right now. I was kind of pissed off they don't have any hills they can run here . . . I'm not allowing them to eat, either,’’ he said. “I figure if we're lighter, we'll be faster. And they'll be more motivated because they'll be hungry.’’

Funny guy.

It sounds like Michalek will be back for the Sharks tonight, which is somewhat concerning. He was already blowing by our D before they all played the equivalent of 4 games in 4 nights. The Marleau line really seemed to suffer without him.

Wilson also mentioned that there is a "good chance" that "The Sheriff" Scott Parker will be in the Sharks' lineup. As if. The guy has played 10 games this year and brings nothing except the potential for a bunch of penalties? Is anyone on Edmonton really going to be intimidated by this clown?

Sacamano's Keys to the Game:

• Conditioning. San Jose was playing 3+ lines during the overtimes, while Edmonton's fourth line might as well have stayed in the change room for the back part of the game. Pronger played 46:54, Spacek played 45:53, Staois played 39:23. Overall, the Oil had 10 players log more than 30 minutes, the Sharks had 7.
  
• Icing. Given the Oil's prowess on the dot, I don't mind them icing the puck. Unless it is Greene and Bergeron on the ice, in which case I want to gouge out my eyes so that I don't have to watch them get worked over by Thornton and Cheechoo.
  
• Crowd. Is the crowd factor still effective in the second game? ESL teachers in Edmonton are doing their part to prepare immigrants for a life in the Heartland of Hockey^tm
• Grabia's Beard mojo. It appears that the hockey gods have forgiven him; but we will only know for sure after tonight's game.
  

Prediction: 4-2 Oil (Moreau, Moreau shortie, Pronger, and Horc with the empty netter)

I'll be watching this one from Golf Town, so I doubt that I'll be back with a post-game recap; but I'm sure the CinO boys will have an appropriately angst ridden and/or deliriously crude post to satisfy your needs to vent and/or carouse.

Every day was a Flames day: one was either talking about the game the night before, getting ready for the next game, or in some bar filled with carcenogenic smoke, spilled rye on red jerseys, a dozen TVs and make-shift projection screens. Everyone was geared up. School kids, waitresses, rap musicians, my 55-year-old Philippino woman technician who, at one point, embroiled me in an argument over the merits of having Robyn Regher quarterbacking the powerplay. It went on and on and on and on.

Man, what a stirring description. The city had some jump, some excitement. School kids, musicians, gangstas, day-labourers, and 55-year old filipinas, all coming together in a Sea of Red to cheer on their beloved Flames. Sounds terrific right? Not according to the Flames fan who wrote it.

Nope, apparently "the prevailing view from around town" is that those two months were "a shit show".

The fact is, I'm afraid to say, lest I receive attacks on my character and loyalty, but I'm actually kinda, sorta glad that the Flames are done. And I'm not the only one.

Many of my fellow Calgarians expressed that same sentiment shortly after the team lost.

It's not because these loyal Calgarians didn't want the Flames to win, mind you. Oh no, it was simply because:

I don't think anyone who experienced 2004 -- other than drunk-ass teenagers and their like-minded wannabes -- was really aching to do it all over again. It would have been too much.

You read that correctly. It would have been too much. Afterall, these poor guys and gals:

. . . went from April to the end of June and missed out on the entire spring season. Stampede was a mere two weeks away, giving us all pause as to the best way to scrape up some dollars and energy to do it all over again.

Hilariously, Cosh predicted nailed this way back on April 13th in a post entitled 'How to spot a second-rate sports town'. The knockout punch comes in his second paragraph:

The message to the team is unequivocal: a second successful playoff year by the Lames will be regarded with active hostility by the wealthy and powerful. Only the most naive fan can fail to perceive the eventual endgame--a quiet, uncontested exit in the second round or thereabouts. Some cities breed champions, some don't.

The Battle of Alberta is over.

Being a fan is tough. Check out what the front page of Covered in Oil would have looked like if a bounce had gone the Sharks' way in OT. When you're busting out the Vincent D'Onofrio in FMJ pic, boy, you're despondent.

The emotional rollercoaster of the fan is even unmistakeably evident in this site's traffic. It's like the Red Mile/Whyte Ave: lively after a Victory, dead after a Defeat. On an emotional level, I understand it completely, but it's still kind of amazing. A frickin' website.

Obligatory post-game Greg Millen assessment: I basically agreed with his comments regarding OT penalties (though I don't know why he felt the need to conclude his remarks with "it's what the league wants": you're obviously aware that you're entitled to your opinions, dude, go with it).

That said, I think this is what Jim Hughson thinks about when he's falling asleep at night: "How do I gently correct my partner when the need for a correction arises from the fact that he wasn't listening to the thing I said not 10 seconds ago?" There was at least two instances of this in the first period, one of which I remember quite vividly:

Hughson: And the shots are 15-1 in favour of the Oilers
[play progresses briefly, Roloson handles a weak shot, no rebound, play stops]
Millen: It's impressive that Roloson handled the puck so well there, cause that is the first shot he's seen all game... uh, and the rebound makes it two, I guess.
Hughson: [silence]

Good times.

Whoooo boy! That, my friends, is what playoff hockey is all about. What an absolutely spectacular game. A pleasure to watch. I'm simultaneously exhausted and totally jacked up.

Just some quick hits before I go lie in my bed and fail to sleep:

• Thornton gets a lot of heat for his lack of points in the playoffs; but, let's be honest, he and Cheechoo were absolute terrors in tonight's game. I was petrified every single time they were on the ice, and I was in the fetal position under my kitchen table when they were on against Bergeron and Greene. Home ice advantage line-matching is just huge in this series.
  

• If he wasn't already there, Ryan Smyth has just joined the pantheon of athletes that should only play for one team. Losing his chicklets and then coming back to play the way he did in the third and OTs? Unbelievable.

• It is simply a tragedy that when the Oilers had no goaltending they could score at will, but now that they have terrific goaltending they have to labour like immigrant dockworkers to put one in the net.

• Most of Roloson's saves come from just solid positioning and great effort; but that save on Cheechoo in OT2 was supernatural. It evoked an involuntary groan as my soul reentered my body.

• For a guy who recently shredded his ankle and who has played three games in four nights, Chopper still had some crazy wheels in those OT periods. I can't wait to see what his brother Chad can do with the conditioning of the rest of the team next season. Raffi looked like he was going to expire on camera in his interview after the third.
  
  
• The footage of Horc giving everyone hugs and smacks on the head in the hallway underneath Rexall after the game was tremendous. Man were they ever excited.
  
  
• One of these days a player is going to take off his skate and stab Scott Oake to death.
  
  
• Have I mentioned how much I like Hrudey? The clip showing Roli's shaking hands after losing his mask in the previous game was terrific. Who notices these things?
  
  
• The Oilers need to get more options than the point shot. Remember when Hemsky first came into the league and he and Smyth kept setting each other up for those beauty tap-ins? Where did those things go?
  
  
• With the exception of the second period, which the Oilers 2006 Playoff Edition apparently don't need to play, the Oilers carried the play. And yet, I still never felt entirely comfortable. They need to find a way to get some goals on Toskala.
  
  
• Nice work on building up that Karma again, folks. Now don't go screwing it up again. Yeah, I'm talking to you, Grabia!
  

Boy that was some good hockey, eh?

It's been a while since I went to bat directly for Tom Benjamin's side in an argument, but I feel like chiming in here. The discussion was prompted by James Mirtle excerpting Eric Duhatschek, and the key graf is this:

"Managing a team these days is still about asset management, but the premium now is going to be on drafting well and keeping those draft choices until they get to unrestricted free agency, even if you have to take them to arbitration." - Brian Burke

Tom thinks Burke is being, ahem, disingenous here, and so do I. TB gets to the nuts down in the comments:

The issue is whether that premium [on drafting well] is now bigger or smaller than it was. It is very obviously smaller.

That's correct, period. I'm not interested (today) in determining whether this is a good thing or a bad thing, or whether Bettman has sold hockey fans a bill of goods, or whatever. But it is very obviously correct to say that when free agency is less restrictive, then in the grand relative scheme of things, pro scouting (good trades, FA signings, etc.) becomes more important and amateur scouting (good drafting etc.) becomes less important.

The key to a GM's success in all sports leagues, but especially where there is a salary cap, is simply to underpay as many of your players as possible by as much as possible. That's a bit glib, but it's another way of saying this: you need players who will outperform their contracts. Ideally, you sign young players to 2/3/4 year contracts just before they make The Leap; you sign experienced players after abnormally poor seasons when their market value is depressed; etc.

Restricted free agents help your team accomplish this, as the restrictions allow you to sign them to contracts for below their market value. Let's say I'm Kevin Lowe, in negotiations with Ales Hemsky, and that every GM in the league agrees that Hemsky's performance will be worth $4M next season. I can pay Hemsky up to $4M and be getting a "fair deal". John Ferguson Jr., however, cannot. For him to be getting a fair deal, he can only offer Hemsky a contract for [($4M) - (the $$ value of the draft picks he has to surrender to me)]. There is a ton of room for argument on what that "$$ value" should be, but it is some number greater than zero.

For the sake of this example, say it's $0.5M. JFJ can thus only offer Hemsky a $3.5M contract, or he's overpaying. I, then, can offer Hemsky $3.6M: it's the best deal he's going to get, and I'm getting a $4M performance for only $3.6M (everyone's happy!).

There are two rewards for drafting well in the NHL:

1. Under the rookie salary structure, you underpay by a ton (in their 1st contracts) for excellent rookie performances (remember that Crosby & the Ocho are making ~$1M/yr)
2. Having the rights to the good players you draft means that you can continue (in their 2nd/3rd contracts) to underpay them (per the JFJ example above) until they reach Unrestricted free agency

Item 2 is less of a reward now, because players reach UFA status sooner & younger. Hence, there's less of a premium on drafting well.

To wrap up, let me just reiterate once again that this does not mean that hockey as we know it is going to hell in a handbasket... if your team has the best amateur scouting department in the league, you are in great shape, because you'll have a constant stream of guys turning in multimillion dollar performances while being paid $0.5M-$1M. But this was also the case before, and now you have less of an advantage trying to re-sign your own draft picks: (A) because the compensation figure (# & Round of draft picks) for RFAs is smaller, and (B) because they become UFAs at a younger age.

Vic Ferrari:

They can send a man to the moon, but they can't develop the technology to put a button on my remote that gives Greg Millen a painful electric shock.

Jes Golbez:

According to the Courier Post Online, 14 players on the Flyers will be having surgeries this month. 14!!! [...]

Given that it's the Flyers, I'm not shedding any tears :)... I'm just a little bit in awe.

No kidding.

Mudcrutch79:

...when I got there, he told me that Spacek had scored to make it 1-0 for the Oil. I responded by saying "Cross ice pass from Hemsky on the PP?" He was surprised and responded "Uh...yeah..." while his girlfriend looked at me like I was a witch.

This too:

I like how Greg Millen is now apparently gun shy about talking about the long change, after the fiasco that was G6 in the Vancouver-Calgary series in 2003-04, when it became apparent that he didn't realize that both teams were subject to the long change at the same time.

If I ever meet Millen, I think I might actually feel a twinge of guilt (I'm way too nice), but jeeezzz...

Tonight's game is all about fixing mistakes.

Grabia has done his part, and now it is time for the Oilers to do theirs. I'm back to being optimistic. If the Oilers win tonight, I'm betting they win Game 4. And if they win Game 4, the sky is well and truly the limit.

Sacamano's Keys to the Game:

• The Oil need a forecheck. Badly.
  
• Pronger needs a little help on the back end.
• I've liked our first shots, but we need some folks in rebounding position more quickly.
• The Return of Stan Weir's Mojo
  

Prediction: 3-2 Oil (Laraque, Smyth, Dvorak)

It has come to my attention that the reason the Oilers lost the last two games is because Andy Grabia, of Sports Matters infamy, shaved his playoff beard. Believe me, I was as shocked as you--he never seemed like a gutless bastard in the past.

He claimed that he was immune to the disastrous karmic retributions because of the "Necessary for Work" clause; but after questioning him about the nature of his work, I discovered that the guy is a "writer" who "works out of his apartment", usually in his superman pj's and bunny slippers, and that his only daily face-to-face social interaction is with the bartender at Scholars Pub on 87th Avenue. I don't know about the rest of you, but it seems unlikely to me that having a beard makes it more difficult to turn on your laptop, string words together, or drink campari and soda.

But, let's be fair, Andy probably wasn't the only fan who royally screwed up this post-season, and he did email me to find out how to repair the damage (regrow the beard? keep shaving? put on a falsey? get implants?). Afterall, it has been pointed out that I, myself, may have tempted fate more than was necessary by changing the "comments" to "Bitter Laments...Triumphant Insights." I'd be more convinced if the context of my triumphalism wasn't the Battle of Alberta, which was clearly won by Edmonton this year, but, hey, maybe the Hockey Gods have all the subtlety of Fenwick.

So, two questions for the comment section:

1. What Karmic Busting action did you engage in--or not engage in--that killed Edmonton's chances to win the first two games of the series? Come on, you know you screwed up something.
   

   Did you wash your lucky socks? Did you forget to wear your sweater on game day? Did you use an inappropriate fishing metaphor to describe the Oilers chances against the Sharks? Did you drink your beer too slowly? Too quickly? Did you prematurely flash your boobs on Whyte Avenue?
   

2. What do you plan to do in order to atone for your error?

If we all act quickly enough, we can turn this ship around. So stink up those socks, get your wife/mother to lay out your sweater so you don't forget to wear it tomorrow, stock up on your usual beer (stay away from the sale items!), and strap in those glands until we actually have something worth celebrating.

And Andy, the answer to your question is that you must shave tonight in order to start afresh. The growth you have going now is tainted and is killing the team. You don't need to start growing another playoff beard; but if you do decide to try again, you better be committed to letting her ride until the very end. If you inappropriately shave it a second time I can't predict what might happen.

You know what else really pisses me off about the Sharks? Their fans. Oh sure, they can yell and scream in the rink, but where are they now? Where is the witty banter? The mocking? The superior attitude that can only come when your team is up 2-0?

Of the five Sharks blogs that I could find:

• one doesn't like anyone linking to him,
  
• one hasn't been updated since April 28th,
  
• one actually agrees with the thrust of an article from the Edmonton Sun listing 28 reasons to hate San Jose,
• one just gives us a disgustingly non-partisan recap of the game, and
• one actually has a photo of Edmonton fans on his site in a non-ironic, non-mocking context.

This smug passive aggressive thing that they are apparently pulling doesn't work for me.

I only caught bits and pieces of Game 1, but last night I caught most of Game 2. Very entertaining, I'd say.

**Le GG had at least four shifts in the 3rd period that were better than a single shift I've seen from Rem Murray in the entire playoffs.

**One of the colour guys I heard a lot this season--McGuire? Ryan Walter?--was obsessive about remarking on broken sticks while penalty killing, especially centres who broke them on faceoffs. I wonder if that delightful 5-on-1 sequence will actually prompt any NHL coaches to take Colour Guy's advice and have their PK play with wooden sticks. (If wood is even 1% more durable, it would seem to be a no-brainer, certainly for 3-on-5 situations).

**If there's one observation that hasn't yet been made in support of Pronger's value to the Oil (hard to believe!), it's that for the entire year, his partner has looked like Edmonton's 2nd best defenseman.

I made a sarcastic comment in a thread back in October to the effect that "Jay Feaster wasn't going to be offering Brad Richards for MAB"; after Bergeron had spent a month or two alongside Pronger, it wasn't obvious at all that it would be a good deal for the Oilers. Spacek looked like Lowe's Steal of the Century when he was rolling next to the Orbs; lately, away from Pronger, he looks more like a late '90s-model Phil Housley, c/w "I wonder if he'll get up from that hit?" feature.

And I hope I'm not accused of foggy hindsight when I say that at times this season, Jason Smith looked like the game had just about passed him by. He was a step slow too often. Now he's playing with Pronger, and the estimable Lowetide spitballs on how MacT gets this thing turned around and says

Maybe they split the Pronger-Smith tandem to give a little more zip to the second group.

It is to Pronger's great, great credit.

If I was independently wealthy and liked to gamble (1-for-2, alas), I'd bet $1000 that this picture, from the main index page of bluemile.ca, is a stripper wearing an Oil sweater in some dude's living room.

YOU make the call! There's a lot of hockey left to be played, but this could end up being the least timely venture in the history of teh intarweb.

Grumpy Prefatory Remarks: It is now the second round of playoffs in CBC's 53rd year of broadcasting NHL hockey on television. And yet, they still haven't found a way to consistently post the clock during powerplays. Memo to Nancy Lee: get your head out of your ass!

Whew. Now that I've taken care of that, we can talk hockey.

It has to be said: San Jose is a good team. A really good team. Their forwards can fly, and when they get possession in deep they are awfully tough to move off the puck. Better than their puck possession, though, is how well they all move without the puck; they are always attacking the net. If I didn't hate them so much I'd probably really enjoy watching them. In general, if I didn't have so much emotionally invested in the Oilers, I'd probably really enjoy watching this series. Good skating, hard hitting, very few penalty calls. Who the hell is Tom Preissing, and why does he always seem to be in the action?

I thought that Edmonton a fair number of decent first shots, and Toskala gave up a tonne of Jussi rebounds, but the Oil were always just half a step away from being able to get to them.

The 5 on 3 enraged me beyond belief, and my television was saved only by that scrambly goal just after it ended. Memo to the Oilers: when only one skater on the other team has a stick, you really don't need to pass the puck around the outside--how about taking it to the net?

I know that the trap or press or selective pressure or whatever we are calling this thing, worked pretty well against Detroit; but it was just painful to see those ridiculously young Sharks d-men skate their way out of their own zone with no pressure until the red line. The Oil need to get on these guys a little more often. Of course, it would help if the Oilers remembered how to forecheck. They sure didn't win many battles on the boards. Remember those days the Oilers managed to put up a fair number of shots while being the best team in the NHL at preventing shots? What happened to that team?

I guess the bright light is that, despite being outplayed by a tough, tough team, the Oil were still only one bad penalty away from playing them even on the scoreboard. The burnt out bulb is that I can't see the Oil winning 4 of the next 5 games against this team.

Tyler has done a final look at scoring rates for the season, and covers all the bases. To sum up in the same metrics as the first time I looked at this:

Even-Strength Scoring: 1 goal every 11:35, last season it was 1 every 13:32 (increase in frequency of 16.8%). (Also, on January 6, it was 1 goal every 11:14; ES scoring slowed down in the 2nd half).

Powerplay Scoring: 1 goal every 7:54, last season it was 1 every 8:42 (increase in frequency of 10.3%). (Also, on January 6, it was 1 goal every 8:01; PP efficiency appears* to have increased in the 2nd half).

5-on-3: The final # of 5-on-3 goals this season was 351, a 127.9% increase over the 154 scored last season. If you simply deduct those "extra" 197 5-on-3 goals from the PP stats above, then PP scoring frequency was 1 goal every 8:29, a mere 2.5% increase. [Disclaimer: even ignoring the absence of data on 5-on-3 opportunities, this might not be the best mathematical way to compare PP efficiencies between the two seasons.]

All this data is important for two reasons. One: as I've mentioned before, and as Tyler and Tom have both discussed in some detail, it's important for assessing the changes to the game in general. I have no problem with the notion of the Eye of the Beholder: some people liked hockey more this year and some didn't, and there is nothing to be argued about here. But if one wishes to speak with authority, it's unwise to stand entirely on perception and intuition.

Second, it should be of some value in assessing which rule changes were wise and unwise; or, which helped scoring and which did not. The fact that the ES scoring rate was up 16.8% while the PP scoring rate was only up 2.5% should offer huge clues here.

The restricted goalie equipment can't have been too big a factor, so if there's safety (or whatever) issues that indicate that the equipment got too small, there's room to slide back without affecting scoring. The obstruction crackdown is a more complicated matter. On special teams play there is certainly less jockeying through the neutral zone (and a lot more stationary play), so to some (small?) extent, less hooking and holding should benefit ES scoring more than PP scoring. But to my eye, most of the "new" penalties are little hooks and holds along the boards and in the corners; a reduction in that type of obstruction should help the PP just as much as ES. Also, why wasn't SH scoring up a lot as well.

Tom Benjamin zeroed in on a conclusion back in January that still seems pretty reasonable: that the increase in ES scoring was caused not by reduced obstruction, but by reduced stoppages. No two-line pass, tag-up offsides, fewer icings. I hope this is the reason, because I personally liked those changes. I was worried that allowing two-line passes would make defensemen play even more conservatively than before, but that's not what I saw, at least.

I also ended up liking the trapezoid. For the first 55 games of the season, I figured it was pretty meaningless, but after watching the Olympics I changed my mind. I no longer have any doubt that allowing goalies to play pucks in the corners reduces the number of offensive "chances" (by which I simply mean the number of times a team gains possession of the puck in the offensive end). Furthermore, there's just nothing interesting or entertaining about goalies playing the puck, and restricting it doesn't eliminate anything that's integral to the game (in my eyes). Is it fair, or unfair? Don't know. I'd be interested to hear any argument, sincere or not, that ditching the trapezoid would make the game better; at this point I don't think there is one.

The last rule I wanted to touch on was the 2 minute minor for "puck over the glass". I don't like it, because I think the penalty is excessive for the crime; I'd like to see the League punish it the same way as Icing (no line change for the offending team, faceoff in their own end). However, not only would this reduce the # of PPs and hence total scoring, it would also result in more guys willing to put it over the glass in a pinch, thus slowing the game down and reducing potential scoring situations. [Footnote here: there was roughly 3 more PPs per game this season than last, up to 11.5 from 8.5. My best guess is that roughly 0.5 of the '3' increase is attributable to the Puck over Glass penalty, i.e. one every two games. Does this jibe with everyone else's perception?]

This is more a discussion for after the Cup has been awarded, but as you are aware, I've been forced by events to amuse myself with non-Playoffs-related material. Your input is welcome.

The Oilogosphere is getting some love from unexpected places -- "Edmonton's 100% Independent News and Entertainment Weekly" Vue Weekly.

It seems that reading Oilers blogs has converted Darren Zenko into a veritable supafan.

There’s one force to thank for turning me (and I’m sure many others) from city-default autofan to relatively well informed and opinionated fanatic, and it’s the same force that’s challenging and changing the way citizens everywhere deal with everything and everyone around them: blogs. . . . Starting with Covered in Oil and, from there, moving out into a network of excellent fan -journalism -- Lowetide, Battle of Alberta and many others . . . I found myself in an atmosphere of smart, opinionated, ferocious and utterly entertaining commentary and analysis.

This atmopshere was so smart, apparently, that it altered Zenko from "a sports-indifferent nerd into a fan committed enough to run four blocks naked through a throng of thousands." In other words, he became the kind of fan who likes to Show his Pole for Stoll on Whyte Avenue. In fact, some forensic analysis of Zenko's photo in the Vue article reveals that he was one of the streakers captured in megapixel by CinO's special correspondent Fish Griwkowsky. The identity of the one-socked bandit remains a mystery.

So, ladies and gentlemen of the Oilogosphere, rejoice! Our efforts have been rewarded. And to you, Mr. Zenko, keep your stick on the ice.

bluemile.ca, 10:53AM MST:

THE SITE WILL BE LAUNCHING ON May 8, 2006...only hours after the oilers defeat the san jose sharks and countless fans celebrate on the blue mile...

Today's Edmonton Sun:

Golanowski said he was going to have a few teams of guys spread along Whyte to capture all the action last night.

"We're going to try and start the flashing as the game is going on," he said.
[...]
Golanowski, who has put together skateboarding videos in the past, predicts the Oilers will win in seven games.

Sounds super. Dude really needs to work on his follow-through: here's the Visit Lyndon Golanowski's Homepage! link at dvinfo.net. Nothing wrong with big dreams, though.

Golanowski, who put the website together with help from 29-year-old friend Suniel Sambasivan, said bluemile.ca will be similar to flamesgirls.com - from Calgary's famous Red Mile - "only tons better with more features and more video."

UPDATE: Great mindsBored guys whose teams have been eliminated think alike.

UPDATE2: 3:23PM MST, and still no Cock for Laraque. Way to take advantage of that Sun feature, Lyndon. (And, good luck getting another mention.)

No rest for the outhit and outhustled. The Oil are back on the ice tonight and need to get the split.

Lowetide has a nice review of last night's game (he has also brought out the big gun for tonight's Karma Blast from the Past; but there really isn't too much to say other than San Jose played a heckuva lot better than the Oilers.

San Jose plays a much different game than Detroit, and it looked like the Oil didn't adapt. Strangely, the Sharks game is more like what the Oilers used to like to play against -- uptempo, forechecking, hard hitting, strong cycling, etc. I'm expecting the fellas to Get Electric for tonight's game and start hitting back. I'm actually not worried in the slightest -- the Sharks played well, but Edmonton was pretty bad and still managed to hang around until the end.

The very good news is that Toskala looked extremely beatable -- if only the Oilers would put some shots on net.

My main man Dvorak looks to be out for tonight's game, meaning that LeGG or Harvey will be in. I'm kinda hoping for Georges, who might be able to pummel that little twerp Nieminen, and who should be able to compete physically in the offensive zone. Harvey might be a little bit less of a liability(?), but Georges has the potential to bring more to the table.

Prediction: 4-2 Oilers (Dvorak, Stoll, Smyth, Horcoff)

Happy birthday to Sacamano,
Happy birthday to Sacamano,
Happy birthday Sac-a-man-o,
Happy birthday to me.

If anyone out there is still shopping for presents, may I suggest playoff tickets?

Like mike w, I know absolutely nothing about the Sharks.

Looking down the roster, I can honestly say that I would only be about to pick out around 6 of them from a lineup.

As such, I will continue to make bold predictions based on little more than blind team allegiances (Go Oil!), the colour of the opposing team's sweaters (teal? Puh-leeze), and the relative toughness of their mascots (are you telling me a Fort Mac driller couldn't take out a shark? Don't make me recommision the Exxon-Valdez.).

[Update]: It is amusing to note that Sharks fans, like their Red Wings brethren before them, appear to be banking on Pronger having "his traditional playoff meltdown". I guess they didn't get the memo either. Note: Mike Chen does not appear to want anyone to link to his site -- if you get that annoying page about spam, just click the address bar and hit refresh a couple of times until the page comes up. If anyone knows how to avoid this, let me know. Otherwise, I'm just going to actively avoid linking to him from now on.

Sacamano's Keys to the Game:

• Does Lee Fogolin have the magic of Stan Weir or Jim Harrison?

Sacamano's Prediction:

• 4-1 Oilers (Dvorak, Smyth, Hemsky, Pronger)
  

Fellows, let's be reasonable, huh? This is not the time or the place to perform some kind of a half-assed autopsy on a fish... And I'm not going to stand here and see that thing cut open and see that little Kintner boy spill out all over the dock!
[Mayor Larry Vaughan]

There is a whole lot of buzz about this Joe Thornton character. Phoff, as only one example, has even stated that stopping big Joe is the " . . . key to the series. If Pronger, and the other Oiler players can shut down Thornton, they stand a chance."

If that's the truth, then I'm not terribly worried. Hell, I'm pleased. Just like Datsyuk in Detroit, JT shuts himself down come playoff time -- especially when the ole "MVP" talk starts to heat up. Let's check his recent playoff numbers:

2003-2004: 7GP - 0-0-0
2002-2003: 5GP - 1-2-3
2001-2002: 6GP - 2-4-6
1998-1999: 11GP - 3-6-9
1997-1998: 6GP - 0-0-0

Heck, even against a backup goaltender and a decimated Preds D he failed to score a goal in 5 games. It's not hard to see why; over his career he has averaged fewer than 2 shots per game in the playoffs, and we all know what happens when scorers fail to shoot.

Nah, I'm not worried about Thornton. Pronger, Staois, etc., will shut him down if he doesn't do it himself first. As Vic at IoF notes, the real question is "Can the Stoll Line go Toe to Toe with Marleau's Line."

It looks to me like the Oil have the advantage on the back end and in net, but that San Jose has some pretty good scorers. In other words, it looks an awful lot like the last series. Calculator has all the numbers, and they pretty much confirm that the two teams are pretty well matched and it is going to be a heckuva series.

Conditioning might also play a factor as the Eggheads at the NHL head office again gave Edmonton a bizarre schedule -- back to back Sunday/Monday games, and three games in four nights. I'm not sure what to think of this. Detroit seemed to have more jump than Edmonton in the OT periods, but in the short-rest afternoon games, Edmonton ran the show.

Prediction: Edmonton in 6, with the same formula as last round. Lots of Dvorak scoring, split in San Jose, split at home, win back to back in San Jose and Edmonton to close it out.

Addendum: From the same IoF post linked above, I love Vic's new verb: phaneufed - to be kept away from the other team's star players.

That's gold, baby.

Just to recall, Alexander Ovechkin had this to say about Edmonton in his first round predictions (þSidearm Delivery):

Edmonton vs Detroit: Detroit in four. This is a very powerful team. You can't just focus on one player. I can still remember how hard it is to play against them. They are a well-oiled machine. I'm pretty sure that Edmonton is doomed.

Well, Alexander the Great is back for more. And it appears that, like Mirtle, he will not be caught with his pants down twice:

Edmonton vs. San Jose - Edmonton in seven. I won't say that the West is the weaker conference. Simply, Ottawa is the definite favorite, and all of the rest of the teams in the two conferences are about equal. Personally, in the West, I like Edmonton most of all-- a brilliant, quick, young team. I thought they'd be finished by Detroit, and subsequently, I'll be pulling for them. I can't have any belief in San Jose. Their outlook mainly results from two players, Thornton and Cheechoo, and in the playoffs they'll be asked to overcome more well-balanced opponents.

Welcome aboard, Sasha! There looks to be room beside the trumpet.

Sidenote: I really don't want to have to do a full post on this, but how is it possible that Edmonton still gets called a young team?

Staois: 32
Pronger: 31
Spacek: 32
Tarnstrom: 31
Smith: 32
Harvey: 31
Moreau: 31
Murray: 34
Laraque: 30
Pisani: 30
Smyth: 30
Both Roloson and Ulanov were born in the 60's for crying out loud.

As Cosh aptly phrased it: "It's been a while since the Oilers could be confused with Muppet Babies; these guys are pretty much in prostat-exam-and-RRSP territory."

Gee, with no team to follow, my attention is really wandering around. Anyway, I had a couple of Business of Hockey thoughts.

**Earlier this week Tyler pointed to a clause in the Roloson trade that's either pointless or illegal, depending on the exact wording. The sentence that caught my eye was this, though:

If I was the NHLPA, the first thing I'd be doing after the Oilers are eliminated is filing a grievance relating to the validity of this condition of the trade.

From most employee unions in most businesses, yes. But the "cost certainty" element to the new CBA has really altered the interests of the relevant parties here.

If you're not clear on the gist of this part of the CBA, let me recap. The Players get 54% of all League (hockey-related) revenues. But the salary cap is actually set at about one-thirtieth of about 62.7% of revenues. If enough teams spend the cap or thereabouts, total league payroll amounts to higher than 54% of revenues. To recover this "extra" money, the league then claws back a percentage of every player's paycheque so that the total amount actually paid to the players is 54%.

The strange but direct consequence of this is that (e.g. every offseason) once the total "book" amount of the league's payroll reaches 54% of league revenues, every "new" dollar paid to a player is literally deducted off the paycheque of every other player in the league.

So back to Roloson: Tyler is right that if Minnesota is in line to receive a draft pick from Edmonton if they sign Roli, it has a negative effect on Roli's value--he's not truly unrestricted. But here's the thing: when and if the NHLPA goes to bat for Roloson and his financial interests, they will be acting contrary to the financial interests of every other member of the union. If voiding the compensatory draft pick means than Roloson is worth an extra $200k, that is $200k taken away from the other 749 players.

Will the NHLPA continue to advocate in earnest for individual players? I don't know, but there's not much of an incentive when "winning" a grievance just means that money transfers among the players.

**On the topic of RFAs again, this same disincentive applies (if less so) to agents. Take an agent with 50 clients, one of whom is Chuck Kobasew. This summer, the job of Chuck's agent should be to find Chuck the best possible deal; if there's a team other than the Flames willing to pay him an extra $300k/yr, then the agent needs to get that deal worked out.

But again, a decent chunk of this $300k is going to come straight off the paycheques of the agent's other 49 clients. Are they supposed to be happy about this? How will agents reconcile this conflict of interest?

**Lastly, back to the new Flames Bar & Grill. It should be fun, etc. etc.. Let's say the Flames make a million dollars in profit off of this thing. Let's further say that the Flames, being pretty financially stable, decide that this means they, as a team, can spend another $1M on player salaries (e.g. the cap is $45M, and they boost their player budget from $41M to $42M).

Great news for Flames fans. Another better player, or whatever. But this $1M is not hockey-related revenue, so it doesn't actually increase the amount that the League as a whole is allowed to pay the Players as a whole. So, that $1M in added Flames salaries gets clawed back from players on all 30 teams, and redistributed back to the owners however that works.

In short: contributing to the bottom line of the Flames' restaurant effectively costs money to the players on the other 29 teams. Reductio ad hilarium: this means that you can go there and get faced with the added pleasure of knowing that every new round of drinks is, indirectly but unquestionably, taking money right out of Derian Hatcher's pocket. Sad caveat: it might also mean that you're giving money to Bill Wirtz.

It is about this time that all those folks who started growing playoff beards (or playoff pants for the ladies), are starting to seriously question whether or not it was a good idea. You look at the playoff schedule, you look at yourself in the mirror, you look back at the playoff schedule, and you realize that you can't shave until the middle of May at minimum (May 12 if you are a particularly pessimistic Oilers fan), and quite possibly well into June.

Oh sure, the uncomfortable itchiness is long gone, but--if you are not already there--you are starting foresee the potential that your beard might actually get too big. I realize that if anyone had told you two weeks ago that your playoff beard could get too big you would have laughed them out of the room; but here you are, in Stage 5 of beard growth.

As someone with greater than average experience in growing facial hair, I thought it might be useful to go through the progression of a playoff beard -- just to help those of you over the mental hump of becoming truly bearded individuals. As an added bonus, CinO Chris! has documented the first couple of stages in his beardwatches - I hope he doesn't mind me outright ripping off his material.

1) Elation

• You get up the morning the playoffs start (or the day the regular season ends -- there is some controversy about when a playoff beard should start), look at your razor and laugh. Today is the day you start growing a beard! You are somewhat bummed that nobody at work even notices, but are secretly delighted at the feeling of stubble on your hand. If you have a girlfriend, she is unimpressed and complains that it "prickles."
  

2) Concern

• You've been growing a beard for a little while now except, well, there doesn't seem to be all that much happening. It is too short to be seen as a beard, but too scruffy for people to think that you just got up late and had to rush out of the house. In short, you look like a hobo. On top of that, it is starting to itch like hell. To quote Stage 2 Chris!: ". . . this hair is starting to drive me crazy . . what was once novel and faintly rugged has now become itchy and publically humiliating." Indeed. If you have a girlfriend, she is very unimpressed and complains that it "looks stupid".
  

3) Cautious Optimism

• The itch is gone! At this stage you might be asking yourself: "Do I have a beard? Are you sure? I really think I might have a beard?" Again, to quote Stage 3 Chris! "I think I may have arrived". Alas, the answer is, no. You have not arrived. But you are only a few connectors and some cheek infill away. You probably find that you are starting to stroke your chin unconsciously. You no longer have a girlfriend, but you have suddenly made friends with a lot of Eng-Lit students.
  

4)Elation II

• You have a beard! At this stage you look in the mirror and say "Damn, I look good in a beard!" or, to quote the Stage 4 Chris! "It's fucking AWESOME. Girls LOVE IT. It feels GREAT on my FACE and I never want to SHAVE AGAIN."
• And it's true. At Stage 4 virtually everyone looks fantastic. This is when your girlfriend tries to come back to you. Hold out, because this is also the stage when all those women who previously had no time for you start to take an interest. I've never really understood this, but if you stop a random woman on the street and ask her whether she would ever consider going out with a bearded guy, she will invariably say no. But show up at a bar with a Stage 4 beard and it is impossible to go home alone.
  

5) Concern II

• Your beard is now full. Very full. Some might say too full. You are on the verge of crossing the threshold from Sexy Bearded Man to Goddamned Hippy.
  
• In the non-playoff world, this can be remedied by trimming up. In the playoff world--where trimming is generally frowned upon--you must ensure that everyone around you knows that you are growing a playoff beard. I can't emphasize this enough. If you don't let them know, then they will just assume that you spend your weekends and evenings protesting the World Bank and playing the bongos for change on Whyte Avenue. If you let them know, they can join in the fun. Everybody loves watching train wrecks, and make no mistake, if your team makes it through the second round of NHL playoffs you are that train wreck.
  [Update]: Fenwick makes the excellent point in the comments that at Stage 5, "while it is permitted or even encouraged to explain the playoff beard, it is a strict no-no to apologize for the playoff beard, an act which senselessly negates its accumulated karma." Indeed. If anything, you should be indignant -- "It's my playoff beard, man, where's yours?"
  
• NOTE: It is not acceptable at this stage to cop-out and decide that you really only want a playoff goatee or other such nonsense.
• If you decided to pick up in a bar during Stage 4, your newfound love is on the verge of splitting. If you didn't get back together with your girlfriend, you should have.

6) Cautious Optimism Part II

• You are a goddamned hippy. Your beard is huge and looks stupid; but your team is deep in the playoffs and looks like they might go all the way. You have become attractive to a whole new demographic of women. Stay away. I repeat, stay away.

7) Elation Part III

• Your team has won the Stanley Cup and you can finally shave the dead animal off of your face, OR
  
• Your team has lost the Stanley Cup and you can finally shave the dead animal off of your face
• NOTE: Since you've put all this effort in, it is a bad idea to simply shave off the entire beard in one go. It is much more fun to remove it in stages (with photo documentation of each stage), and give yourself at minimum the Friendly Mutton Chops and the Hulihee. Wear them around town for a day or so, just for the fun of it.
  
• NOTE: After taking the whole thing off, your face will have the texture of warm mozzarella cheese, and you will have the complexion of a 14 year old.
  
• Your girlfriend will return but, forgetting about your Stage 4 sexyness, will stick around "only if you promise to never grow a beard again."

Good luck, all!

You'd have to be crazy not to see the Sea of Red as a physical manifestation of groupthink right now: every time Darryl Sutter made a strange move or said something completely incomprehensible, Calgarians were there to offer unblinking Stepford-esque justifications. They crowed continually about their '04 Stanley Cup run, yet they nodded with every stroke of the knife as Sutter filleted the '04 roster.

That's Colby Cosh, dancing on the grave of the Flames' season. As usual when discussing anything Calgary, he's found a kernel of truth, then called it a cornfield.

For starters, the guy came in as coach halfway through what would be their 7th consecutive season out of the playoffs. He was named GM as well after that season, and in his first season as coach/GM, the Flames came within one win of the Stanley Cup. What would be crazy is not giving him some benefit of the doubt. Under his dictatorial watch, the Flames turned from a bad team into a good team. He deserves credit, period.

In this past season, Sutter's 2nd as coach/GM, the Flames were as good or better as the team that won the Western Conference. They had a slightly better regular season and a slightly worse playoff. Before the season, I looked at the changes in the lineup and came to this conclusion: the backup goaltending was worse, the defense was better, and the forwards were cause for concern. This, I'd say understatedly, was roughly borne out by events.

Was Sutter careless about ditching players from the West Champions' roster? I don't think so, but it's a good question. I've taken a look at the roster changes for four teams, comparing how many players were the same between their final game of the 2004 season and their first game of the 2006 playoffs. I chose Tampa Bay, because they won last time and were clearly worse this season; San Jose, because they were good last time and remain good; Edmonton, because they had a very similar regular season and better playoffs (and on account of the name of this site), and Calgary.

• TAMPA BAY LIGHTNING: From Game 7 of the 2004 Cup Finals to Game 1 of the 2006 Playoffs, 15/20 players were the same (Out: Khabibulin, Cullimore, Clymer, Andreychuk, Stillman. In: Burke, Prospal, Craig, Ranger, Artyuhkin).
• SAN JOSE SHARKS: From Game 6 of the 2004 West Finals to Game 1 of the 2006 Playoffs, 10/20 players were the same.
• EDMONTON OILERS: From Game 82 of the 2003/04 regular season to Game 1 of the 2006 Playoffs, 11/20 players were the same.
• CALGARY FLAMES: From Game 7 of the 2004 Cup Finals to Game 1 of the 2006 Playoffs, 9/20 players were the same.

At first blush, it looks like Cosh is objectively correct, although injuries are a factor. Both Lombardi and Donovan were injured in the 2004 game, and certainly would have been in the lineup; likewise for Marcus Nilson this year, which would have put the Flames at 12/20. But then maybe if those guys are healthy Simon doesn't draw into one of the games (or maybe it's fair to fully count the turnover in pressbox guys). I'd give them a "score" of 11/20.

In other words, the real outlier here is the Lightning, which is a real eye-opener, and might independently bust Cosh's argument. It is freaking remarkable that they iced virtually the same team this season as when they won the President's Trophy, and yet were considerably worse. Everyone's temptation here is to attribute this to the loss of Khabibulin, but as mudcrutch has shown, that simply ain't the case: the Lightning were worse because they suddenly became (A) average offensively, and (B) worse defensively, particularly on the PK. It's stunning, really.

Hanging with mc79hockey for a second, Tyler frequently makes reference to my dismissal, or denial, of the fact that the Flames' record through most of the season was better than they deserved. Obviously I'm in no position at the moment to deny that he was right, but the change in the Lightning makes a point that I never did, at least well enough.

I was never indifferent about the Flames' goal differential because I thought they were immune to the statistical laws of nature. It was because past performance has limited use in predicting the future. There was no earthly way in September that you could have looked at the Lightning's '03/04 performance, and their limited roster changes, and the ages of their top players, and the changes in the rules & enforcement, and concluded that their scoring relative to the league would drop by half a goal per game. And yet it happened: they were mediocre all year, right up until being bounced from the playoffs.

I doubt that there's a bigger fan than me of the work Tyler has done on his site (this is a whole other post). But all statistical analysis is based on shit that has already happened. I didn't think that the Flames G.D. at midseason was necessarily an intractable feature of the roster. As it happens, it looks like it was, but it wasn't necessarily so, as Marty, Vinny & friends have amply demonstrated.

Anyway, back to Sutter! The glaring roster losses, at least at forward, were Conroy and Gelinas. I loved Conroy, and thought he was allowed to leave (as a UFA) too casually, but it was defensible, at least at the time. He got offered a 4-year, $12.6M contract by the Kings, after a season in which he scored 8 goals in 66 games. This was before the CBA/salary rollback, and no clubs had too great a clue as to what their financial position would be after the lockout. (Laff from the Past: radio broadcaster Peter Maher said frequently during the lockout, somewhat plausibly at the time, that "no team would be hurt by the lockout as much as the Calgary Flames"). Today, you look at Conroy's skills, and intangibles, and his $2.39M/yr contract and say, "Hell, how did we let him go?" As for Gelinas, if you know a guy's going to score three series-winning goals, you sign him at any price, but without knowing that, it's a lot less obvious.

ALL THIS SAID: Darryl Sutter made one terrible error that I'm not willing to give him a pass on simply because "hindsight is 20/20". The whole fooferaw with Phillipe Sauve in late January, that ended with he and Steven Reinprecht being traded away for Brian Boucher and Mike Leclerc, was a horrible disaster in every respect. Actually, it wasn't one error, it was some or most of the following errors (a few are mutually-exclusive, but you should be able to sort that out):
- Coach Sutter humiliated a young player in the media
- Coach Sutter called out a player without then giving him a chance to redeem himself
- Coach Sutter lied about the work ethic of a player
- Coach Sutter talked down the value of a potentially desirable player in advance of a trade
- GM Sutter compounded his coach's ill-advised diatribe by trading the player away
- GM Sutter traded away one of his better offensive players for a guy who couldn't even make the playoff lineup
- GM Sutter lied to the fans about why the trade was made (to improve their backup goaltending)
- GM Sutter downgraded the team at forward in order to make a meaningless change in backup goalie
- Coach Sutter failed to get the best out of, or failed to give an opportunity to, an experienced playoff-tested forward who ought to have been a more useful player
- Coach Sutter failed to give his (upgraded!) backup goalie any more starts (3 in 33 games) than the previous one, denying his All-Star starting goalie some (and I don't care what anyone else says about this) much-needed breaks
- Coach Sutter and GM Sutter made the team worse. Up to and including that blowout loss to the Avs that set Sutter off on Sauve, the team was 29-20. Since, they went 20-20. This is slightly more obvious to (say) baseball fans, but the difference between a .600 Win% and a .500 Win% is significant.
- And finally, Sutter might have done himself, and the team and the organization, not-easily-reparable harm. Part of the attraction, such as it is, of playing for Sutter and the Flames is Sutter's consistency: clear expectations and fair treatment, for everyone, all the time. What Sutter did to Sauve (and Reinprecht) might make both potential free agents and current Flames players less attracted to being part of the organization. Especially in a cap era, with a fixed sum of money available to the Players, this stuff is important.

I don't know where the Flames are going from here. It sounds like better than even-money that Sutter will assume the duties of GM only in the coming weeks, and hand the coaching reins over to someone else (probably Jim Playfair). If you're guessing that I'm in favour of this move, you're right.

I think Sutter is a good coach; better than average in a league with a lot of good ones. But the laundry-list above is basically the ne plus ultra of What Bad Things Can Happen When The Same Guy is Both GM and Coach. The best and easiest way to mitigate any other (or further) harm is to promote Jim Playfair and announce loudly and clearly that he's ready, and it's His Team.

Developing...

I'm sure most Flames fans are about as interested in reading about hockey right now as I am in writing about it, but here goes anyway. (Private Time is over!)

The Flames are pretty much set, from both a hockey and business perspective, on the defensive end. Their starting six defencemen and the soon-to-be Vezina Trophy winner are all wrapped up for 2006/07. (All salary info from TSN.ca)


The D is, in some senses, unimprovable: if anything, they can afford to trade a guy assuming Mark Giordano and/or Richie Regehr are ready for full-time duty next season. Hamrlik is overpaid, but that's neither here nor there at this point. The only need here is a backup goalie who is good for 20-25 starts.

The Flames have eight (active) forwards under contract for next year, for a total of $15.7M: Iginla ($7M), Langkow ($2.44M), Amonte ($1.85M), Nilson ($1.37M), Simon ($1.22M), McCarty ($800k), Lundmark ($575k), and Ritchie ($450k).

It all adds up to about $29.4M in contracts for next season. At this point, you can look at things one of two ways:

1. Fret about the value the Flames are getting for some of these contracts. Shouldn't we be getting more production for Amonte's two mil? What should we legitimately expect from Iginla for seven mil? Do we even want Lundmark on the team anymore? Or Simon?
2. Realize that the Flames are $15,000,000 below next season's salary cap with essentially no needs to address except scoring.

Our own unsigned forwards include Yelle, Kobasew, Lombardi, Donovan, and Huselius. (And Leclerc.) Some of the cap space has to be used on some of these guys. I truly think that Lombardi has yet to hit his stride as an NHL playmaker (Kobasew I'm less sure of). I love Donovan and his speed. Any hockey fan has got to love Yelle, but Nilson is fit to assume his role. At any rate, some of these guys will be back and some won't, and you're still looking at over $10M available to spend on scorers.

What's out there? Well, the Flames could compete with a dozen or so other clubs for the top UFAs: Daniel Briere (nice), Marc Savard (pass), David Vyborny (maybe), and a handful of other (mostly much older) guys. The alternative is to be willing to give up a few draft picks--which as the trading deadline demonstrated are a devalued currency--and target younger Restricted Free Agents. Now here you find some quality. Get a load of this gallery of talented RFAs selected from a random NHL division:





There's also Richards, Cheechoo, Spezza, Havlat, Gagne, Gomez, Nathan Horton, Staal & Cole, Bergeron & Boyes, and most of Buffalo's roster. That, folks, is a shopping excursion that I could actually get excited about.

The assumption underlying all this is that the Flames can and will spend close to the cap number, and I don't actually know this: the nearest thing Ken King gives to an indication is his frequent mentioning of being in the Top 10 Payrolls.

The Flames should be spending the cap, or thereabouts. Calgary is rich and hockey-nutty; ticket supply is overwhelmed by demand; and the Flames must sell more merchandise than most or all of the other teams in the league. The Flames, in a phrase, are a large-market team.

The Flames have fifteen million dollars to buy some more pucks into the opposition's net. It'll be interesting to see how they go about accomplishing it.

UPDATE: Here's the compensation schedule for RFAs, based on their average salary in the new contract:

Up to $660,000 - No compensation
$660,000 to $1 million - One 3rd round draft pick
$1 to $2 million - One second round pick
$2 to $3 million - One 1st and one 3rd round pick
$3 to $4 million - One 1st, one 2nd and one 3rd round pick
$4 to $5 million - Two 1sts, one 2nd and one 3rd round pick
Over $5 million - Four 1st round picks

From the calgarypuck moderators comes the funniest post I've ever seen on a hockey message board:

FYI we've set it so new registration approvals are delayed by a day or so.

This is to cut down on any trolling and let the fans have their "private time".

Don't worry Matt. If you want some Private Time, I'm sure we can all do without you for a day or so.

But don't be a stranger, kay?

That was something. Holy outplayed, Batman.

I'm not going to post much right now, because as we all know, you kind of hate everything when your team looks bad. Maybe two things:

• Scott Niedermayer: fantastic tonight. I think when he's in the mentality of a defensive defenseman, he's probably better and more valuable than as a two-way guy.
• Jarome: he tried too hard tonight. I didn't like his decision to fight early in Game 6 either. But I can't bring myself to lay much of this series loss on him. The two games when the Flames could have taken serious control of this series, Games 2 & 4, Iginla was by far their best player. It was like he was the only guy who really understood the risk of letting it become a short series.

I agree with Kelly Hrudey that the Ducks ought to be heavy favourites against the Avalanche, with the caveat that we still, frustratingly, after 3 games, don't really know if Bryzgalov is any good. Later.

. . . Sha-Na-Na-Na, Hey Hey Hey, Good-bye.

I can't lie, it's bittersweet.

While it's fun as hell to see the Flames lose, I'm a more than a little bit bummed that the Hockey God who appeared in Matt's tortilla and told him to start this site with me turned out to be nothing but teflon shavings from the Fenwick frying pan.

I wonder if Team Canada has any interest in a young D-man who went -3 in the biggest game of his career, or a high priced scorer who only managed to put up 1 shot in 24+ minutes of playing time.

This is Joe Mullen, from New York City, NY. His hockey career started in the street, on roller skates, with a roll of electrical tape for a puck. He was never drafted, and spent his early adult years racking up points and awards with the Boston College Eagles.

He was signed as a free agent by the St. Louis Blues, and was instantly a solid pro (CHL Rookie of the Year, followed by 117 pts in the CHL, followed by 59 pts in 45 games in his first partial season with the Blues). Not long before the 1986 playoffs, Cliff Fletcher acquired him (along with Rik Wilson and Terry Johnson) for Eddy Beers, Gino Cavallini, and the lovable but plodding Charlie Bourgeois.

Mullen was, in short, an awesome Flame. He helped the team to defeat the Oilers that year and to win the Cup in '89; he was also a key member of both Cup-winning Penguins teams. As a fun bonus, he was also tremendously weird to listen to. He had the thick Hell's Kitchen accent, but furthermore, his mouth was hamburgerized by a high stick early in his Flames career, and the injury & reconstruction affected his speech as well, giving him the rare combination NYC/Bit-my-Tongue accent.

I bring up Joe for two reasons. First, Lowetide had tremendous luck using old Oilers as charms for playoff wins. So, like a typical hockey person, I'm mimicking success rather than trying to come up with something better on my own.

Second, if Chuck Kobasew ends up having a good pro career, it'll be because he played a lot like Mullen. Kobasew is bigger and faster than Joey Mullen ever was, with a better shot to boot, but he doesn't have Joey's game yet. Joey never proved his toughness by giving out punishment, always by putting himself in positions to take some. We know Chuck has the ability to score goals, but can he start scoring more of them, or more important ones? If the Flames need a big goal tonight, and the odds are that they will, can Chuck get himself into that position where he bangs one in a split second before being hammered? I think he's ready, but the bigger question is, does he...

Game 7 of Flames-Ducks goes at 7PM MDT tonight. Before the series, I thought the Flames' key advantage was their consistent strength on home ice, and again, I think that still holds true. When I go back through the list of home games this season, I'm hard pressed to find any weak performances in big home games. The list probably begins and ends with a loss to Vancouver in early February; you might include the opener against Dallas, too. Past that, whenever the Flames have really needed a home win to turn things around, or to stomp on a key foe, they've gotten one.

Other Keys to the Game:

• Will the Flames be able to again take advantage of Niedermayer or Getzlaf out of position to create good scoring chances?
• Will Dion Phaneuf be able to create any scoring chances by risking his position? Confidence is everything here, and I've no clue as to Number 3's mindset.
• Will Andrew Ference be spooked by his three minors in Game 6? A passive Ference is a lousy Ference; the Flames need another strong performance from him.
• Can the Flames play the Ducks to at least a draw on special teams? More directly, can they pot a PP goal at some point in the first two periods?

I expect the lads to play a very good game tonight; really, there's absolutely no reason to expect anything else. 2-0 Final, with maybe an empty-netter to top it off and send the C of Red flooding into the streets. Go Flames.

Well, well... I sincerely thought before the playoffs that the Flames-Ducks series would be the first one that was over, but with Buffalo and Carolina both winning tonight, it's gonna be the last.

I'm starting to get a little edgy, and at the bottom of it all is this: I'm not ready for the season to be over. When the Hockey God appeared to me in a vision and told me to start this site with Sacamano, I don't think it was so it could end with a 7-game loss to the Anaheim Mighty Ducks and a 4-game sweep by the San Jose Sharks. I think it was for the showdown, man.

The Wednesday night forecast for the Red Mile is "Clear. Wind north 20 km/h becoming light in the evening. Low minus 2." Perfectly amenable for a brief but spirited celebration, under the expectation of more to come.

**What a shot by Yelle to score the opening goal! That's the kind of offensive skillz we've come to know and love from the man who scored 4 goals this year. I think he could have blown it over the goal line with more velocity.

**Yelle again: that was a bad penalty. In the context of the 2006 Playoffs, I thought the refs did a decent job (except for calling back that Ducks goal in the 1st, of course). There was some cosmic hockey justice, in that the only PP goal of the game was scored on Yelle's dumb penalty: that and Rob Niedermayer's high-sticking penalty were the only fouls that were legit, no-brainer calls under any standard of enforcement.

**Counterintuition: the idea of throwing an OT game is irrational, but I think I could construct a case advising the Flames to decline the powerplay early in the game, before everyone has had at least two shifts. Whatever sense of urgency the Flames enter the game with just seems to dissipate on and after an early PP. When you go on the PP 23 seconds into the game, the basic result is that ten of your top players take their first shift with a "patient" mentality rather than a frantic one. I don't know if this is unique to the Flames, but I hate the way it sets the tone, especially the ~82% of the time when it doesn't result in a goal.

**Don Wittman: isn't it time to rest up for curling season yet? The CBC (and everyone else) keeps the same broadcast team following a whole series. Logistical concerns aside, I assume the primary rationale is that they can more readily refer back to earlier moments of the series at relevant times. Well, I've decided that this is a bug of the system, not a feature. Wittman is driving me mental referring back to the same six incidents/comments over and over again.

I've also mentioned his over-reliance on the stat sheets. Last night, he deemed it worthy of mention that "Joe DiPenta is the only Mighty Duck not to have registered a shot on goal in this series". Come on now. There is simply no one to whom a team's 6th D failing to record a SOG in 5 games is interesting, in any way. (Now that I've brought it up, wait for it: some time when DiPenta touches the puck in Game 7, Wittman will mention that "he recorded his first shot of the series in Game 6".)

**Selanne was pretty awesome, and yet still a bit snakebitten. The goal that got called back was a beauty. The goal he did score was a nice shot, although Kipper was out of position. And on both 5-on-3's, he had nice chances but fanned just enough to give Kipper a chance to stop them (likewise with Scott Niedermayer; if the Flames had ended up winning that game, those two guys would have been beating themselves up over the missed opportunities).

**Looks to me like Phaneuf has probably shaken off his slump, or whatever you want to call it. There was a nice moment (in the 2nd, I think) where he came around Kipper with the puck and coasted just for an instant. At that moment, when he's playing poorly and/or tentatively, he glides a bit more and chips the puck up. When he's playing well, he accelerates. Last night, he accelerated. He also smoked Todd Fedoruk again -- man that guy has taken some licks.

(Supporting data point: it looks like Sutter is rolling all 6 D again. They had a pretty tight range of ice time last night, from Leopold's 17:40 up to Hamrlik's 22:30.)

**The Flames didn't test Bryzgalov enough. A lot of credit for that goes to the Ducks' skaters, but Jarome should have thrown more than 1 shot on him, and Simon has got to hit the net when he fires it.

**Byron Ritchie has played in all 6 games so far, but if Lundmark (and/or Macdonald) is going to be inserted for Game 7, I don't think Ritchie has done enough this series to hold his spot. Leclerc needs to stay in.

The Flames had their opportunities, but last night, the better team won. Tomorrow, however, is another day.

OK, so, for the next day and a half, Oiler fans may proceed with their Algonquin Round Table on whether it's cool to cheer for the Flames ("so we can kick their asses personally!") or not ("f**k 'em right in the ear!"), and enjoy the first days since about mid-November where the Oil has been in better position than the Flames.

The one game note for tonight: I hate to belabour this point, but Scott Niedermayer was the 1st Star in that game? Yes, he can skate! Terrific! But Selanne has easily been the best Duck this series, and he certainly didn't whiff on any more scoring chances tonight than SNied.

Then again, I don't really want to pick at his pact with Satan. I have no doubt that many before me, in dressing rooms and Zamboni runways across North America, have shaken their heads at how easily his mistakes and faults are forgiven. Time for Game 7.

WOOOO HOOOOO! It has finally happened, the Oilers have signed Tyler Spurgeon.

What? Game? Huh?

I'm sort of at a loss for words regarding the game tonight. Just a huge, huge comeback in the third. Local boy and clutch performer Fernando Pisani sparks the comeback, and everybody's least favourite player yesterday but favourite player today--Hemsky--seals the deal. What else is there?

Required Misty Eyed Comments about the Opposition
This photo gallery (to the right of the page) of the Wings locker room shows some pretty unhappy people. Apparently Legace, when asked how he felt after the game (why do they keep asking these stupid questions) said, "How do I feel? I feel like I want to go home and hang myself." Yikes, I sure hope he doesn't act on those feelings. Legace wasn't horrible, and he certainly didn't cost the Wings the series. Hell, I'm not even convinced he cost them any games.

Stevie Y was pretty classy being the first guy to skate over to the Oilers bench to shake hands. Playing with torn ribs has to be pretty painful. It had to be his last game.

A big shout out to all the excellent Detroit bloggers who traded banter, especially Christy, A2Y, and Matt.

Bonus Events

• The Flames blew another game (NB:the consensus appears to be that Oilers fans are never allowed to cheer for the Flames -- even in the event that it will produce a Battle of Alberta [contra Grabia]).
• Canucks Fans will be even more bitter
• Pleasure Motors is currently being restrained from "having sex with inanimate objects".
  

Required Note About Controversial Goal:
The third goal looked good to me. The CBC reverse angle showed conclusively that it was definitely not a high stick, and it sure looked to me like the puck went in off of Hemsky's leg after being pushed into the net by Lidstrom, but maybe there was better footage on NBC showing some 'distinct kicking'?). But even if it wasn't good, it should probably be considered Karmic Retribution for the Shanahan goal that came off a missed tripping call on Peca and perhaps even the Lidstrom pick goal. Given that Wings fans were so understanding about those two calls, I'm sure they will be understanding about this one too. But, as I said, from everything I've seen, I think it was a good goal. Stevie Y thought so too, or so he said in the post-game interview. [Update]: nhl.com has highlights of the controversial goal. If you right click on the video while it is playing you can choose to view it at a slower speed and in full screen mode. With some deft clicking, you can pause at the relevant spots to see that, indeed, when Horcoff actually makes contact with the puck his stick is perfectly parallel to the ice and is well below his shoulders. Additionally, you can see the puck bounce off of the Oilers logo in the middle of Hemmer's chest and into the net. It wasn't anywhere near his feet, nevermind being kicked in the net.

Thoughts on the game later. For now, we have a serious problem.

Grabia and I were discussing it this afternoon (his thoughts on the problem here), and we couldn't come to a satisfactory resolution.

Is it permissible to cheer for the Flames tonight, only to ensure a Battle of Alberta? OR
Do we need to wait for them to be in a 7th game? OR
Is it never permissible.

We need to solve this.

Go.

Just listened to Roger Millions on the radio, live from Anaheim:

• Sounds like Giguere will get the nod in goal. That means Carlyle isn't panicked, and it's probably the right decision for Anaheim. It's not like we've seen reels of Giggy goofs and Bryzgalov saves. Also, I readily admit to having felt discomfort when they flashed Giguere's playoff OT record on the screen before extra time in Game 4 (then 8-0, now 9-0). The Ducks certainly won't be playing scared in front of him; not on his account, anyway.
• Don Koharski and Rob Schick will be on the whistles. Roger thinks this is fantastic news, and that they'll "strike the right balance". He's one of the guys who generally likes the concept of the tightened penalty standards, but gets mad at all the bad/cheap calls and no-calls. (In other words, he almost always thinks the refs are doing a terrible job.) I agree that confident, experienced officials can't hurt, but I think he's overly optimistic.
• Yes I Would Like to Know More Dept: Roger talked about today's media scrum with the coaches, which featured, and I quote, "a lot of stupid, stupid questions by stupid reporters". Regrettably, he didn't go into more detail.

Go Flames.

The classy fans at LetsGoWings have started a thread entitled, "Who do you hate the most?, Direct all of your hatred towards Oilers players here!"

Pronger jumped out to any early lead, along with 'Edmonton Fans', but it appears that Rollie is getting some buzz as is "the red headed/bearded guy, forget his name, but i hate him. his face makes me cringe..."

[Update]: I spoke too soon. After some inspired nominations for the CBC announcers, the Wings fans have started eating their own -- including Yzerman.

Can't you just feel the optimism in Detroit today?

Over at the new blog Puck This!, contributor Andrew Potter has a question. The lead-up will sound familiar to everyone, I think, though this is a better way of saying it:

An OT loss is the equivalent of a healthy man dropping dead of a heart attack. One minute, as alive and energetic as you can imagine, then suddenly, instantly, it is over. The psychological effect can be devastating. The devastation increases the longer the OT lasts. Losing in the first period of OT is not as bad as losing in the second. Losing in the third or fourth is raw agony. You end up physically exhausted and emotionally shattered.

Which gets us to the question:

Can we imagine a scenario where a team would be better off simply refusing to participate in the OT sudden-death scenario, give the team a quick and easy goal, and set about focusing on the next game? I'm thinking of a situation where the effect of losing in OT will actually make it more likely that the team will lose the next game as well. [...] Is there a decision matrix we can construct which would making throwing a game in OT rational? Could a coach ever have the necessary information to make that decision? Set aside questions of sportsmanship or integrity of the game or value to fans.

It's not trivial exactly, but I think it's pretty easy to answer "No" to all these questions. The one number that's known (or thereabouts) in this problem is 0.5; you'd be sacrificing half a win to your opponents. (I don't know that you could dream up an example of a team with much less than a 50/50 chance of winning an OT game, yet that still harbours hopes of winning a playoff series).

For the decision to sacrifice that "half a win" to be rational, the coach would have to feel assured that act of conceding would be worth at least half a win later in the series, relative to losing the OT game.

More to the point, the coach would have to grant Potter's premise, and I don't think it's obvious at all. Losing a hard-fought OT game is certainly heartbreaking and disappointing, but is it really devastating? I'm not going to do it, but it is testable. Find a list of (say) all games that went to at least the 2nd OT, scratch off all the Game 7's, and then look at the series results for the teams that lost those games.

I'd expect their record in those series to be under .500 -- not because of the devastation factor, but because of two other reasons: (1) you're surveying the records with the pre-condition that their opponent has won at least one game, and (2) surely more often than not, the "better" team wins those long OT games. It's better than .000, because I can think of at least two examples of a team that lost such a game and then won the series: the '04 Flames (lost Rd.1 Gm.6 in 3OT, won series) and the Devils in '94, who lost a 4OT game to the Sabres on a Dave Hannan goal, but went on to win the series and make it to OT Game 7 of the conference finals against the Rangers.

On the testing again, you'd look at the series records of the team losing the "devastating" games, and compare it against a control group: teams that lost a game under some other uncommon circumstance (say, where the GWG came on a shorthanded breakaway). If there IS a difference between the series records of teams that lost under these twin circumstances, you can quantify it, and there's your answer.

But I'm not going to test it, I'm just going to reject the whole premise on intuition. I don't think that it's devastating, or that losing a tough OT game has any negative predictive effect on a hockey team. Numbers that might look like they show otherwise can probably be explained away by the fact that it's a Loss (the max. is 3!), and that much like 60 minute games, the better team will win long OT games more often than the worse team.

Game 6, CGY @ ANA, 9PM MDT

I woke up this morning in a verrrryy cautious and superstitious mood. I suspect it was inevitable, but the elite & frequent Flames commenter peter mentioned something yesterday that no doubt cinched it:

And some people are saying Giguere has lost it (maybe that's fair) but I maintain his replacement is not better. In fact, at the risk of awakening the ghost of Wade Flaherty, I say bring on the backup for game 6.

I happen to agree entirely with his assessment of the Ducks' goaltending situation (if you're skeptical, take another look at the Flames Game 1 OT goal), but things like Wade Flaherty happen.

You (er, Flames fans, anyway) may remember the 1995 playoffs. The Flames lost the first two games at home, being at various times outplayed and outlucked. But by the time Calgary won Game Five at home 5-0 to take a 3-2 series lead -- on the heels of a win in San Jose where Theoren Fleury had a shorthanded hat trick -- the Flames looked like far and away the better team. And yet they couldn't put it away in Game 6, and while they mostly dominated Game 7, they got stoned by Wade Flaherty (56SV/60Shots) and eventually lost in 2OT on a goal by Ray Whitney.

Here in 2006, the Flames don't have a comparable edge over Anaheim, but they have shown themselves to be the better team. They've moved into a position to clinch the series in Game 6 without needing any Kiprusoff heroics to speak of. They've won two of the last three games in pretty dominating fashion, one of which was on the road, and the third really could have gone either way. They've only allowed one real even-strength goal in those 3 games (the Getzlaf breakaway - O'Donnell's OT goal was also ES, but before Yelle got back into the play from the penalty box). This is all pretty good stuff.

Unfortunately, none of it counts for dick-all towards winning that 4th game. The Flames' play makes me optimistic about tonight's game, but the hockey gods make me nervous.

If I was a Hockey God and could write the game script, I'd make it an early Iginla goal, followed by Kipper continuously robbing Selanne and Lupul blind for 2-1/2 periods for the 1-0 victory. It would remind potential 2nd-round opponents that this is just a two-man team, with the bonus of making their shooters concerned about putting every shot hard-top-corner. Since I'm not a Hockey God, I'll be hoping for another three-goal lead early in the 2nd period, thank you very much.

Actual prediction: somewhere in between, probably a 2-1 regulation victory that has my stomach in knots until the final horn goes. Go Flames.

There are only two playoff games tonight, and each has greater than average interest around these parts. In addition to the insanity Edmonton will experience if they manage to seal the deal against the Wings tonight, a concomitant Flames' victory will result in The Battle of Alberta. I'm too superstitions to say more about it than that, but Sports Matters is fully embracing the idea. Remember, if the Oil and Flames lose tonight, the Karma Buster himself can be found at Scholars Pub near the UofA Campus wearling the "I Love Nerds" hat.

Back to business. Obviously there is the small matter of actually beating the President's Trophy winners one more time. Mac-T has noted several times over the last few days that the fourth win is always the toughest. I like the tack the Oilers are taking -- they have to not only duplicate the effort of Game #5, but they have to be better.

"We're happy with the situation," said head coach Craig MacTavish. "But it's a case where we know the fourth win is always the toughest, especially against a team like Detroit that has so much experience. The one thing they're not going to do is they're not going to panic. They're going to come in here and play a whale of a game. We're going to have to be better than we've been at any point in the series to get the win."

The fact is, though, the Oilers are confident and are not even thinking about this series in terms of "upset" anymore. The Wings? I never realized what a drama queen Manny Legace was.

I'd like to think that Detroit will actually Bring It, tonight, given that it is their last kick at the can; but, frankly, it is tough to know what to expect. They certainly didn't bring much to the table in their last two games.

If Stevie Y plays tonight, I hope that the Rexall crowd gives him some love -- especially if Detroit loses since it may well be his final game.

Random Karma Fact: The last time the Oil had a chance to win a series in Game #6 (1992), they did -- on a goal by none other than Craig Mac-T, himself.

Sacamano's Keys to the Game:

• Score first on Legace, and then have random players skate by to mock him. With any luck he will be in tears before the end of the first.
• Play KISS during pregame.
  
• Jim Harrison

Rule 47a: "A minor or major penalty shall be imposed on a player who skates or jumps into, or charges an opponent in any manner."


I guess the officials felt that Cleary was penalized enough on this play. It's tough to argue with them.