Until Rookie Camp & Training Camp....

This post will be about Angelo Esposito (and also about Kris Letang, Filewich, Stone, and Kennedy). This post will also be the last one about these particular subjects until rookie camp or training camp--and by that, I mean, until there are ACTUAL EVENTS to be written about and discussed.

At this point, however, it's summer, and prior to the start of free agency tomorrow*, fans are already wondering which of the team's prospects are ready for the jump to the Crosby Show next season. And given the recent rookie success of Crosby, Malkin, and Staal, fans are no doubt wondering: Can any of these prospects play a key role on the team next season? If so, how key of a role? Will they be able to step in and play mistake-free hockey? Will their development be helped or hindered by time with the big club, more seasoning in the AHL, or in Esposito's case, a return to junior?


KRIS LETANG

Let's look at the case of Kris Letang first (because, in my opinion, Letang is the easiest). Letang's already scored goals in the NHL. After being returned to his junior team, he destroyed the junior level competition. In between starring for his QMJHL junior team, Letang captained Canada's entry at the World Junior tournament to gold while being honored as one of the tournament's best defenseman. He's worked to improve his weaknesses (which he still admitted this week to being playing sound positional defense), and he was named the top defenseman in the Q this past season. If all accounts are to be believed, Letang learned from his time in the Show last season and allowed that to catapult him to the further development and improvement of his overall game.

All that said, I expect Letang to stick in the NHL next season (given general manager Ray Shero has already basically said as much), barring incredibly unforeseen circumstances. That being said, Letang is primarly an offensive defenseman. And young defenseman who are learning how to play defense in the NHL take longer to learn how to play defense than forwards usually do to play their positions. That's just how it is. Letang will need a responsible, reliable defensive parter to play with at even strength. And, in terms of easing him into his role, it's probably best, a not excessive amount of even strength minutes, no penalty killing, and the second team power play unit--that is, until Letang shows he is capable and prepared to handle more duties. (Say what one will of Therrien, but he eased Staal in last year, and while I wish he would've given Staal more responsiblity--e.g. time in front of the net on the power play--later in the year, I can't argue with giving a player more responsibilites as his play progresses.)

When it comes to Letang, Pittsburgh fans are best forewarned. He's a talented offensive defenseman. I believe he's the closest to NHL ready of all the Pens' prospects. But for young defensemen learning how to play NHL defense for the first time, there will be bumps in the road. There will be giveaways or out-of-position plays, and while those plays can hopefully be minimized, they will happen, at least occasionally. As long as Letang is proving to be more helpful than detrimental to the team's chances to win, I expect him to stick with the big club. And with Letang, at some point, that huge "upside" has to be allowed to develop in the Show--it's just that with most defenseman, the development comes in the Show.

Which basically boils down to: don't expect Letang to make the drastic difference that Crosby, Malkin, and Staal did in each of their rookie seasons. Letang will be making a difference provided he makes outlet passes well, settles into a role on a power play unit, and learns how to play consistently solid defense at even-strength throughout the 2007-08 season.

(And, of course, if Letang does make a drastic difference or is a Calder Trophy nominee, be pleasantly surprised rather than making the error of assuming he should be a Calder Trophy nominee and being sorely disappointed when he isn't.)


ANGELO ESPOSITO

Oh, good grief. What can be said about Angelo Esposito that hasn't been said? He was once a consensus first overall pick for his draft year. He fell to the Pens at 20th overall. There are reasons he fell. Depending on who you are talking to, Esposito is either the next coming of Daigle and a sure-fire bust or a player who is going to win next season's Calder Trophy winner playing on Crosby's wing. While my opinion will likely disappoint the opinionated extremists on both sides of the "boom or bust" Esposito debate, I think the truth is likely somewhere between the two extremes.

Positives about Esposito: He has skill, lots and lots of skill. He has speed, which one would think would (eventually) make him tailor-made for the new NHL. He can issue pinpoint passes, and he can score goals. He has shown he can play well with talented linemates (Alexander Radulov was his linemate for much of his rookie year in the QMJHL), and the Penguins have lots of gifted potential playmates for Esposito. Basically, the positive, which can't be stated strongly enough, especially when you pick at 20th overall as the Pens did, this kid has the talent, potentially, to become a star.

Negatives about Esposito: Oh, where does one begin? For whatever reason, Esposito has appeared to "tail off" at the end of seasons (at least if statistics are examined). This season, his second-half scoring slump dropped him from #1 overall to #8 overal in the rankings for North American draft-eligible skaters. His rookie season, he didn't score nearly as much in the playoffs as he had during the regular season (contrast to Jordan Staal, who scored 10 goals in 19 playoff games and whose first NHL playoff appearance showed that there was perhaps something to that junior performance). Whether Esposito's scoring slumps are a matter of a lack of strength and endurance not yet built up (something that can be fixed over time), it's still a matter of concern. And, obviously, of course, is the fact that Esposito's still skinny for his height (180 pounds, and six one). Esposito needs more muscle mass, particularly upper-body muscle mass. In order to play more successfully, whether in juniors or the NHL, Esposito will have to learn how to play through physical play and still create and finish plays when the checking gets harder, tighter, and tougher. Esposito also has an injury history that puts up a couple of red flags: he's had 2 concussions and rumors about a sore back.

Curiosities about Esposito (These "curiosities" cannot yet be labeled as positive or negative traits, necessarily, nor are they "proven." They're more "thinking aloud" based on various information): Esposito speaks three languages fluently. He once wanted to be a doctor, and he completed two years of high school in one year. Speaking in purely academic terms, the kid is obviously academically intelligent. That being said, many observers questioned Esposito's head. Hockey intelligence and academic intelligence are rarely equivalent, and while some hockey intelligence can be taught (this is the simple play to make here; this is appropriate positioning), some things, like hockey intuition, are much more difficult to teach. Other concerns about Esposito, interestingly enough, also involve his head, and would have been much more of a concern for a team that drafted him higher than did Pittsburgh. Given how Esposito responded to the pressure of his draft year (his scoring totals dipped), does the kid have what it takes to handle pressure situations? Coming to Pittsburgh, where he'll likely be counted on to be a supplementary "star" if he ever reaches that point rather than the focal point, how much does his response to his second junior season reflect character traits that will always follow him?

My Conundrum/Analysis: Without having seen Esposito play in rookie camp or training camp, I can't say my opinion is anything but conjecture at this point. Nevertheless, Esposito has not yet shown he can handle the physical rigors of playing in the NHL. He has not yet shown an otherworldly sixth sense for defense (there was a reason Jordan Staal got fawned over last year, and it had at least as much to do with precocious defensive play as it did with his last name) or even a consistent otherworldly offensive sense that would enable him to overcome his still not-yet-developed stature. In terms of pure physical strength, count me on the side of the skeptics that says Angelo Esposito needs at least another year playing in juniors to gain the strength to play against men.

That being said, however, I see Pittsburgh, rather than the Patrick Roy-coached Quebec Ramparts, as the ideal place for Esposito to develop into the player he is supposed to be. If you want to teach him how to play wing, have Yeo work with him the way he worked with Staal last year. If you want to teach him strength and conditioning and to add muscle, let him spend some time around Gary Roberts and professional strength and conditioning coaches. And, honestly speaking, I'd rather have Michel Therrien, who's proven his worth as a developmental coach, around Esposito than Roy. Roy has not yet proven he can develop and mold and teach young players. I'm not convinced Esposito, under Roy's tutelage, would gain any more "hockey sense" or learn how to play effectively on a wing. And granted, Roy's job is to win games for the Quebec Ramparts, not to teach Esposito every skill the Pens would want him to have. Still, a huge part of me screams that Esposito's development could happen, far more fruitfully, in Pittsburgh, under the watchful eye of those who have, thus far, shown themselves to be effective at developing young talent.

Still, my conundrum exists. Because Staal, just like Esposito, didn't play on the Canadian World Junior team his draft year. And yet Staal was physically ready to play in the NHL against men, and well, physically speaking, if Esposito's not ready to play against men, it's detrimental to his development to put him in a position for which he is not yet prepared.

Tentative Conclusion: When it comes to Esposito, strengths, weaknesses, question marks, etc., one thing seems to stand out: He's not a sure thing. That's why he fell to 20. Sure, maybe some future day we know he's a sure thing to one extreme or the other. But unlike Crosby, Malkin, and Staal (who showed this defensively in his 1st season), he's not a sure thing. And at pick twenty, I'd rather take the upside of a player who could someday be Crosby's regular wing rather than a relatively sure fire third line grinder or second pairing defenseman. But it's just with the players who aren't sure things, you have to be "careful" with them. So much depends on development, on things clicking, on--so many factors can inhibit those players who aren't sure things in stark contrast to the way that all those factors roll off the back of those players who are "sure things."

So what do I think? I think it's likely Esposito sticks around for most of training camp, and provided he's healthy and not totally incapable of dealing with the physical play, a few games. And then, unfortunately, I think it's back to juniors. I see Esposito as being a player who might take longer to get to the place where he can score goals on a line with Crosby--and that depends on staying healthy and continuing to gain strength. E.g., I have an easier time seeing a 20-year-old Esposito challenge for a Calder Trophy than an 18-year-old Esposito remaining with the Pens all season. But I still believe the sooner Esposito is in the hands of the Pittsburgh Penguins organization full time, the better.

But, you know, at least it's one more potential thing to look forward to, and another promising prospect to watch with eager eyes.


The Baby Penguins-- Filewich, Stone, and Kennedy

All three of the above players, perhaps Filewich the most, have shown they can handle the rigors of the AHL. Unlike the Trifecta, these players wouldn't be expected to make an immediate, obvious impact in the form of loads of points or stunning artistry. They'd be expected to play roles, supporting and supplementary roles, well.

Yet as the Pens' recent graduates from the AHL to the NHL showed, there is a time period when a player is above the AHL and yet still not quite ready for a full time job in the NHL (particularly not a full-time job on a contending team). Players like Erik Christiansen and Max Talbot had times when they'd clearly surpassed the AHL, but weren't yet full-time NHL regulars. In short, these are the players who might not stick full time in the NHL at the season's start, but could definitely be regulars on the Pittsburgh roster by the season's end.


And in every case...

When it comes to Letang, Esposito, Filewich, Kennedy, and Stone, we've only seen Letang play in the NHL, and that was last season, before another year of seasoning in junior. We don't yet know how these players are going to perform in rookie camp, in NHL preseason games, or at training camp. We can certainly make great guesses as to how the players will perform, what they'll excel at or struggle with, but the point remains-- We don't know.

And until rookie camp comes, until training camp comes, and until the NHL preseason games start, how will we know if Esposito can handle physical play? How will we know how Filewich looks on the second or third line? How will we be able to measure how much Kris Letang's positional defense has improved?

Lest we think training camp or preseason games matter tremendously, let's not forget that Jordan Staal had some rough moments in camp and in preseason games. And while (repeat until you get through your heads, spoiled Pens fans) none of these players are Jordan Staal, it's worth remembering that one preseason game or a session or two at training camp are not anything to get too worked up about--either way. But until the time comes to have something tangible to get worked up about, how about not getting worked up at all?

And next year, with these kids, all of whom it's too soon to label as "wasted pick" or "wow, simply astounding," how about just seeing what happens and enjoying the fun, exciting, but roller coaster ride that often comes with the development of skilled young hockey players?

*It should be noted that, obviously, if the Pens should happen to sign a top 6 wing over the free agency period, that the chances of "giving one of the kids" a chance at wing is, quite obviously, reduced.*

Politics and Growling

I hate politics. All right, let me be fair. I don't hate all politics. I hate arena politics. I hate the fact that the arena financing isn't yet completely secure. I hate the fact that the arena might be delayed. I hate politics being played in the media; I hate that both political parties in Pennsylvania seem more keen on playing political football and scoring points than actually governing. I hate the media's hype and overhype that makes it difficult to distinguish what's serious and what's not. The only thing, apparently, that I don't hate is ranting.

Because that above paragraph was a rant, which should basically be encapsulated as saying, "Get it done! Just get it done! Pass the bill! Yes, of course, pass your budget, and pass what's necessary to be passed! But stop adding stuff or subtracting stuff and using the Pens as a way to your own way (whatever way it might be). Just, please, pretty, pretty, pretty, please, get that financing in place so that arena can get built. Like, seriously. Just do it. Yesterday. But if not yesterday, you know. Now. Right now. And hurry. There isn't time to waste."

Fans of the Pittsburgh Penguins are currently the envy of many fans of other NHL teams. The Penguins' incredible and young talent screams that great things should happen, and soon--and that youthful talent also yells that it is going to be a fun, entertaining ride to climb, once again, to the top of the mountain.

You have Sidney Crosby, the best player in the world, who's only 19. You have an all-world talent in Malkin who is the first-line center for most other teams in the NHL, and he's only 20. You have a six foot four monster man-child in a teenager who scored goals and played shut down defense as though he'd already played 10 NHL seasons. You have a young goaltender who just completed his first 40 win NHL season. You have a defenseman in his early twenties who's already finished among the offensive scoring leaders at his position. You have "role" players with character and heart, who make players laugh, hit hard, and compete every shift (Colby Armstrong and Max Talbot spring to mind the most here). If that's not enough, you have a kid who captained the Canadian World Junior team to a gold medal who looks like he's ready to start using his right-handed shot on the Pittsburgh power play next season. And, in years ahead, you've somehow just managed to draft a player, 20th overall, who has definite star potential (even if that potential may not be immediately realized) to complement your other young stars. You have a really, really, good thing, a thing so good that it caused the team's front office to start a waiting list for season ticket sales. You have something really, really special.

And you're going to screw it up over petty politics? Please. No pretty please anymore. Just don't. Just don't. Because hockey fans know, and Penguins fans surely know, what a special thing this team could become. One of the best hockey players of all time, Mario Lemieux, surely has an inkling of what all this youthful talent could become. And it's good. Really good. So good it's best not to imagine it right now and just enjoy the ride.

But how about letting us actually enjoy the ride? The players did their jobs fabulously this past season and have given no indication they plan to slack off and stop.

So to the governor, the politicians, everyone involved in getting the bill passed: Do your jobs. Do the deal. Pass the bill.

And if you want a clue about how to achieve something, perhaps you ought to pop in a tape of one of the many comeback victories of the 2006-07 Pittsburgh Penguins. Though some of those kids couldn't even legally drink, they sure knew how to take action to do the jobs they were being paid a salary to do.

How about, if it's too much of a stretch to work as hard as the kids did, at least imitate the kids and pass the bill? And how about learning from the kids who finished with 105 points, the fourth best turnaround in league history, before anybody really expected them to do it?

C'mon. I'm not asking the politicians to meet unreasonable, outlandish, otherworldly, and premature expectations. I'm asking the ostensibly adult politicians to grow up, act their ages, and do their jobs--and governing should mean action, not petty squabbling.

Enough ranting. But the Penguins need funding for a new arena, and the kids need to stay here. Otherwise from whom will the politicians learn about how it is possible to excel at one's job?

Ronnie's Home

Ron Francis is now a 1st ballot Hockey Hall of Famer, an honor richly deserved. All of Francis's nicknames over the years, e.g., Ronnie Franchise, St. Ron, etc., exemplify how fans, media, and everyone in the NHL, loved Ron Francis. Francis seemed the rare player who was consistently beloved.

On the official website of the Pittsburgh Penguins, there is currently a picture of Francis wearing the captain's C on his Pittsburgh jersey. Francis left Pittsburgh many years ago, and he was honest about the reason he left. Yet Francis was always cheered when he returned to Pittsburgh. Fans who loved Francis when he was a Penguin still cheered the same classy player and person when he returned to the Igloo as a member of the Carolina Hurricanes.

Today, years after Francis's retirement, seeing that picture of Ronnie wearing a Penguins uniform and the captain's C still brings an automatic smile to my face. My smile is involuntary; it's not something I can help or withhold. I smile when I see Ron Francis.

Francis is well known for his exemplary work on and off the ice, but perhaps what I most remember about Francis's days in Pittsburgh (particularly after the Cups were won) are things that don't get spoken of as frequently. For years, in addition to winning faceoffs, scoring goals, and playing a complete game pretty much flawlessly, Francis was one of the key leaders of a Pittsburgh team that needed leaders. Later in his tenure with the Penguins, Francis did something he's never gotten enough credit for: he helped to ensure Jaromir Jagr was both a sane and productive player. One of my favorite Francis stories happened when Francis explained that Jagr couldn't do the thing he'd done that night (the thing had something to do with giving up, quitting on the bench, late in the game, in frustration). At the end of Ronnie's chat with Jags, Jagr thanked Francis for dressing him down--yes, seriously, Jagr thanked Francis for trying to help him to become a better player. But Ronnie Francis got reactions like that, from everybody, because that's who Ronnie Francis is.

For me, a lifelong Pittsburgh Penguins fan, saying the name "Ron Francis" will always bring a wave of good feelings, and a smile, to my face. Francis's statistics alone would have been enough to earn him induction to the Hall on his first try, but it's that positive reaction that everyone had to Francis that would have put him over the top on my ballot (if I had one; they don't--not yet--give bloggers ballots). Because Mario Lemieux, Jaromir Jagr, former teammates of Francis's, as well as his former opponents, as well as his coaches, as well as any media members, and plain old fans like me--our reaction to Ron Francis is the same. A smile and a feeling of gratitude that a man like Francis graced NHL rinks so successfully for so many seasons.

So to Ron Francis, St. Ron, Ronnie Franchise, to the former captain of the Pittsburgh Penguins, to the player who was the heart and soul of the Hartford/Carolina franchise, congratulations on an honor richly deserved. And for anyone who has the chance to visit Ronnie in his new home at Hockey's Hall of Fame in Toronto, here's to hoping you share in the smiles that spring to the faces of all those who had the privilege of enjoying Ron Francis's presence in the NHL for so many seasons.

Really, Gary?

Soaring Expectations*

And a Multiple-Choice Question

Gary Roberts likes the Pittsburgh Penguins. Roberts is happy with the way he has been treated by the organization, and he enjoyed his time playing with the Penguins' children. In fact, he enjoyed the kids so much that he signed up for another tour of duty with the Pens' kids. And in doing so, Roberts only confirmed, aloud, a pervasive feeling that is beginning to reach most parts of the NHL.

When Roberts signed a $2.5 million 1-year contract with the Pens, he let slip that he believed the Pens were closer than Ottawa to winning the Stanley Cup. He said he believed it would be difficult for Ottawa to return to the Cup finals, and that, after seeing how Ottawa played against other teams (presumably New Jersey and Buffalo), that he believed perhaps all the Pens needed was "experience." While it's not a huge deal to be considered closer to the Cup than the Maple Leafs, a team that missed the playoffs, it's hardly a small thing for a returning veteran to say that he believes his own team is closer to winning a Cup than are the defending Eastern Conference champions. In fact, what Roberts said was huge in that Roberts verbalized what the Pittsburgh organization, and others around the league, are coming to believe.

The sentiment around the NHL is a dangerous one, and it's one seen as not if but when this group of Pens captures the organization's third Cup. And after last year's turnaround, expectations have soared. The youth and veterans who comprise the Penguins aren't going to be happy merely to make the playoffs this year. At some point, and very soon, this team is not going to be satisfied with anything less than a Cup. Which is all well and good, really, and it's what should be expected when you boast the kind of talent the Pens do. But let's allow ourselves a moment of reflective honesty: it's darn scary, too.

When you become the kind of team the Pens are on the verge of becoming, you are the team that every team in the league guns for because they want to stop you. At some point, all this gunning at is ridiculous (see the 1992-93 Pittsburgh Penguins, during the regular season, anyhow). However, this young hockey team is not yet at the mature point where their players are in their primes and are easily equipped to dance around and laugh at all the fancy attempts made by opposing coaches and players to stop them. The Penguins aren't going to surprise anyone next season. Teams will be studying videotape and matching lines, and they will be doing this during the regular season. Teams will be doing whatever they can to stop the Pens' offense, and while that's easier said than done, particularly in regards to Sidney Crosby, Malkin and Staal, their precocious oodles of talent aside, still have lots of developing to do. To have to develop, as they will, with other teams suddenly emphasizing not just stopping Crosby but stopping Malkin and Staal, too, well--

It's just enough to make this Pens fan pause and appreciate how much she loved the 2006-07 season. Having no expectations, aside from a bit of improvement and growth from the kids, the team exceeded my wildest dreams in the regular season. And even in the playoffs, Crosby and Staal gave me tremendous hope for the future. Yet this multiple-choice question has been floating in my mind for awhile:

In the 2007-08 season, it is most likely:

A. The Penguins compete for the President's Trophy and win the Atlantic Division and earn home ice advantage for the playoffs and win many postseason games.

B. The Penguins suffer through injuries and periods of sophomore slumps and make the playoffs as a fifth, sixth, or seventh seed, but manage to advance to the second or third round of the playoffs this time.

C. The Penguins' regular season isn't quite as successful as the 2006-07 season, and the team is once again ousted from the playoffs in the first round.

D. Various problems, e.g., injuries to key players, sophomore slumps, inconsistent play and coaching, lead the Pens to miss the playoffs by a narrow margin.

The thing that frightens me about the above multiple-choice question is that I can see "E," as in "any" of the above being possibilities for next season. While I see no reason for Staal and Malkin to regress rather than progress, they wouldn't be the first players to struggle more as sophomores than as rookies. I wonder what happens if an injury befalls a key player at a critical time (something the Pens were very fortunate with in the 2006-07 season). And yet I see the same thing that everyone else in the NHL sees, which is why "A" cannot be eliminated from consideration as an outlandish pipe dream, the way we assumed it would have been just a year ago.

At some point in time, though, and it will happen: The players are going to have acknowledge the raised external and internal expectations. It's what happens the first time the team fails to meet those soaring expectations, I think, that will ultimately determine whether answer choice A, B, C, or D, proves most true in the 2007-08 season.

*Probably the first of many posts about the seriously high expectations that the Pittsburgh Penguins will be expected to meet, and will expect themselves to meet, in future seasons.*

Roberts and Recchi

Excellent, but....

Both off and on the ice, Ray Shero delivered excellent news when he announced that he had resigned veterans Gary Roberts and Mark Recchi to one-year contracts. Neither contract is outlandish, and more importantly than just monetary factors, Roberts and Recchi provide a veteran presence sorely necessary, both on and off the ice, for a very young team.

What Recchi and Roberts bring off the ice is not disputed. Even as Pens' fans joke about Mark Recchi's usefulness as Jordan Staal's landlord, the fans understand that it's necessary for younger players to have a few older players around off the ice. And not just because some of the youngest Penguins literally need a billet house with an older teammate (which will be even more true next year if Kris Letang and, though it's unlikely, Angelo Esposito, make the team). Rather, Roberts and Recchi bring a wealth of experience to such things as travel, conditioning, eating properly, etc., to the team. Roberts and Recchi have won Cups, and say what you will, but most teams don't win Cups until they have players who have helped to teach them what it takes to win a Cup. Off the ice, Roberts and Recchi bring stability and experience to a young, talented team that could tremendously benefit from stable, experienced veteran leadership.

Roberts and Recchi aren't just useful as the "veterans in the locker room," but are likewise tremendously valuable on the ice--but not for the reasons one might at first assume. Gary Roberts and Mark Recchi are both valuable on the ice because, at this juncture of their careers, they are both no-maintenance players. By no-maintenance, I do not mean that they can play 30 minutes a game without problem, but that in the minutes they do play within a game, they are going to know what to do and how to do it. Fans already love Gary Roberts and know that he knows when to dish a thundering check that changes the momentum of a shift and a game. While fans are more likely to complain about Recchi, Recchi's "no maintenance" value is probably best seen in Game 4 of the Pittsburgh-Ottawa first round series. No coach had to tell Recchi to use those old legs and race back to keep the puck from going into the empty net; no coach had to tell him how to do it. In small plays that win and lose games, in the simple plays that talented kids sometimes haven't yet been forced to master, Mark Recchi and Gary Roberts both exemplify what it means to be a "no-maintenance" hockey player. And, in demonstrating what it means to be a "no maintenance" player, Recchi and Roberts will help the Pens' obscenely talented youth begin to develop, also, into players who wear the label "no-maintenance."

For all the on and off-ice good that Roberts and Recchi bring, I must return to a post that I wrote late in the 2006-07 season (called "The Veteran Myth"). The "veteran myth" states that players like Roberts and Recchi, because they have always fulfilled certain roles quite well, must continue to be relied upon to fill those same roles based upon their experience in said capacity. My current opinion remains the same one I held when I first typed out "The Veteran Myth." And that opinion is that Coach Michel Therrien and his coaching staff must not allow veteran players who have "always done that" to continue to do a job that could be better performed by a younger but more inexperienced player.

The power play unit for next season would provide an easy example of "The Veteran Myth." Sticking both Mark Recchi and Gary Roberts on the first team power play unit would be a mistake of monumental proportions. Not allowing all six feet four inches of Jordan Staal to have some time in front of the crease on the power play due to the "experience" of Roberts and Recchi is not just incredibly shortsighted, but fundamentally wrong. Young players need the chance to master a specific skill set, and young players can do this while still helping their teams to win games. The challenge for the coaching staff will be to monitor the playing time of the Pens' graybeards, to use them wisely, but not to overuse them--and not just to prevent injury and burnout, but to allow the kids, the kids who have to play starring roles when it comes to time to compete for the Cup, to begin the process of assuming such starring roles.

For the wealth of on-ice and off-ice experience and leadership that Roberts and Recchi bring to the Pens, for the fact that both wanted to remain with the kids, I welcome them back with open arms, clapping hands, and lots of loud cheers. However, Penguins' general manager Ray Shero needs to work in conjunction with Michel Therrien and his coaching staff to ensure that the veterans and the kids are utilized properly--and that might mean, perhaps more far more frequently than in the 2006-07 season--that a few of the kids start to do some of the things, such as, for example, stand in front of the net on the power play, a little more often than do the veterans.

Angelo Esposito is Not Jordan Staal But....

Okay. I'll admit it. It was nice to go back to rooting for my Pens. And by this, of course, I mean, rooting for the precipitious falls of 2 talented teenage prospects, both of whom, for a variety of reasons, were ultimately drafted lower than where they were projected to be drafted.

Had I been live-blogging the draft, my in-the-moment thoughts would have been something like, "Drop, drop, drop, drop, drop," and "Please don't pick the players they keep showing on the TV." While I had a feeling the Rangers wouldn't let a talented Russian scare them off, I was still hoping that a natural wing, and a goal scorer, to boot, would be available for my Pens to snatch at 20. Alas, Cherepanov is now property of the New York Rangers, may have the chance to play on the same team as his idol, and Penguins' fans are spared another Evgeni-Malkinesque escape-from-Russia saga. (Not that I would have objected to the saga considering the talent of the player in question.)

To resume the thoughts of my live-blogging that wasn't, after the Rangers snagged Cherepanov, it was just countdown until number twenty. Since the TSN cameras would not leave Angelo Esposito alone, well, neither could I. At least not in my mind. My absolutely articulate thoughts of "Drop, drop, drop!" continued even as I watched other players get picked, even as I knew that Esposito was not a Brian Burke-type player. And then the announcers who asked, "Could he be lucky enough to have Pittsburgh take him?" And, of course, what I later read about how the team searched frantically for nameplate but didn't have one. But who really cared about a nameplate when your team gets a player at 20 that they had expected to go much higher? Really, I was too delighted to care. I had rooted for something to happen, for my team to "win," so to speak, the chance to draft Esposito, and they had. That was nice.

After my excitement at snagging a player whose talent had him ranked as the consensus #1 overall pick just a year ago, I began to wonder about Esposito. How had he fallen from a consensus first overall pick to being available for the Penguins to grab in the 20th spot? And more than just wondering about Esposito's "freefall," I wondered what it might be reasonable to expect of him. And thus began the googling, which led to a few conclusions, which are summarized by the title of this post.

Angelo Esposito is not Jordan Staal. Angelo Esposito is not Jordan Staal. Repeat. Nor is Angelo Esposito Evgeni Malkin. Angelo Esposito is certainly not Sidney Crosby, a player to whom he was once, ridiculously, ludicrously, outlandishly, and too early compared. No. Angelo Esposito is Angelo Esposito, and that means, well--what does that mean?

Before dealing with Esposito, let's deal with the people who heaped unrealistic and some would say absurd expectations upon the kid. He spent his rookie year in the Q playing with another player who starred in the Q. He was the Q's Rookie of the Year and won the Memorial Cup as a rookie. Not too shabby a debut. And at this point, the hoopla started. Ridiculous hoopla. Esposito this, Esposito that. He was a talented kid, a year (ONE year) removed from playing high school prep hockey, but suddenly he was supposed to be the second coming of Sidney Crosby (a once-in-a-GENERATION-talent). And not only that, he was supposed to be the best player on the defending Memorial Cup champions, a team that was supposed to stay great no matter the loss of talented players to the ranks of the NHL teams that drafted them. Worse than that, probably, this kid played on a team coached by Patrick Roy. While Roy is one of the best goalies in NHL history, to say that he is fiery and eccentric would be a vast understatement. Playing under Roy is going to be a challenge any day of the week, no matter his legitimately great NHL playing experience.

And then came this season. And the scouts poked holes wherever they could find holes. It wasn't like Esposito wasn't helping them out--he got cut from Canada's World Junior team. He didn't put up the stats he'd put up in his rookie season. He couldn't carry his team on his own. And his team got booted in the first round of the playoffs. And those "questions" surrounded him. Was he too soft? Could he carry a team on his own? Was he too selfish? Did he use his linemates well enough?

Before going into more detail about what might be reasonably expected of Esposito, let's talk about reasonable expectations for the team, media, and fans. Let's not make the same mistake everyone did a year ago when they began to heap ridiculous, absurd expectations upon Esposito. Let's make sure not to make that mistake. And let's consider what some of our unreasonable expectations might be.


Unreasonable Expectation/Comparison 1:Sidney Crosby played and starred in the NHL at age eighteen. So if Sidney could do it....

Counterpoint: No, no, and can I say a very emphatic NO just one more time? Sidney Crosby also broke Mario Lemieux's rookie points scoring record. Esposito is surely not going to do that.


Unreasonable Expectation/Comparison 2: While Esposito might not be ready now, he might be ready to do in two years something like what Malkin did this year.

Counterpoint: No, no, and no. Malkin spent time playing in the Russian Elite League against men. Sure, Malkin had (and still must continue) to adjust his game and learn the English language. But the Russian Elite League could very well be the second best hockey league in the entire world. Being trained while playing against men is very different than playing against boys in the QMJHL.


Unreasonable Expectation/Comparison 3: Nobody really expected Jordan Staal to do what he did last year. And while Staal wasn't Crosby, or even as offensively flashy as Malkin, he still stepped in as an eighteen-year-old and took a regular shift. Why couldn't we expect Esposito to "surprise" us and do something similar?

Counterpoint: Jordan Staal was already six foot four and two hundred twenty pounds. Despite his age, Staal's precocious physical development was definitely a factor that enabled him to transition easily to the NHL game. Likewise, Staal had been utilized the previous year by Peterborough Petes' coach Dick Todd primarily in a defensive role--in other words, part of the reason Staal had such a phenomenal rookie season was due to his on-ice defensive awareness.


Of all the unreasonable expectations that could be foisted upon on Esposito by the organization, the media, and the fans, it's perhaps the comparison to Staal that concerns me the most. The organization surely knows how exceptional Crosby is and how Malkin is still a world-class talent. The media and fans, when they're minding their manners and using common sense, likewise seem aware that Crosby is unique and Malkin is slightly less special than Crosby. The most dangerous viewpoint, for the organization, fans, and media, seems to be expecting that Esposito could be able to transition the way Staal did.

Two things about Esposito must be noted, neither of which, necessarily, are anything that time and development can't heal. Esposito is six foot one and a hundred and eighty pounds. In other words, weight-wise, he's small for the NHL at the moment. He needs to fill out and add muscle mass, hardly an incurable problem, but not one necessarily solved in a summer's time. Secondly, Jordan Staal played for the Peterborough Petes under legendary coach Dick Todd. Dick Todd knew how to coach and develop junior players. Patrick Roy has proved he is one of the finest NHL goalies in NHL history, but he has yet to prove anything in terms of DEVELOPING (not just coaching) junior players. Staal had the benefit of excellent and experienced junior coaching and precocious physical development, and both benefits were major factors as to why Staal was able to end the 2006-07 season as a Rookie-of-the-Year candidate. Let me repeat, once again, that Angelo Esposito is NOT Jordan Staal. Esposito had the chance to play under a NHL Hall-of-Famer, but not an expert and seasoned junior coach. And as far as physical development goes, Esposito's weight has yet to fill out to match his height, at least by NHL standards--and Jordan Staal was already among the biggest men in the league last season.

Perhaps because of the heavy expectations and labels that burdened Esposito for the past year, I am leery of expecting him to stick for the 2007-08 season. I am leery that the Pens' organization might erreneously believe that another talented 18-year-old with the potential to be a star one day could step right in and skate a regular shift at age 18. Though for the most part I trust Ray Shero (until he proves he should not deserve my trust), I'm more frightened still for the expectations that might be heaped upon Esposito by the media and the Pittsburgh fanbase. If the Pens' think they just found Sidney Crosby a winger, and Esposito sticks but scores 11 goals and 15 assists while playing on the third and fourth lines, well, how is he going to compare to the rookie sensations fans and the media have grown accustomed to over the past couple of seasons?

Now, of course, Shero is right when he says that coming to Pittsburgh might be the perfect place for Esposito. He can skate like the wind, play with lots of young, talented players, and never have to be "the guy" on his team. And, to some degree, if the team is successful, and Esposito shows development as a player, well, the fact that he's probably not going to be another Pittsburgh Calder Trophy nominee will just have to be something fans and the media get over.

So, to summarize a lengthy, rambling post: Esposito should not be expected to make the team next season. At this juncture, provided he's not ridiculously out of his league, I see no harm in a few-game NHL cup of coffee, at the start of the season, provided he will help the team win games (which must be a consideration with a team now expected to make the playoffs). I agree with fans who've stated that they'd like to see Esposito spend as much time as possible with Crosby, Roberts, et. al to adjust whatever real or imagined "issues" he may have. Frankly speaking, I'd rather have him spend as much time as possible with Coach Michel Therrien rather than Coach Patrick Roy (but that's another post for another time, perhaps to be expanded upon later in the long, summer months). But if Esposito comes to camp and isn't ready, well, don't freak out. He's eighteen, a kid, and eighteen-year-olds, save for ones not named Crosby, Jordan Staal, and Jaromir Jagr, tend to need a few more years before they're NHL-ready.

But the thing that had Ray Shero, other fans, and me, screaming in our heads such inarticulate nonsense as "Drop, drop, drop, to us, please!" is that Esposito, like Crosby, Malkin, and Staal before him, shares the trait that you look for when you draft. It's called "upside." Had the Pens been picking closer to the top of the draft, they would have had more than "one short" interview with Esposito. They might have learned what caused other teams to back off, or they might have learned about his upside. And, drafting at 20, you have to go with upside.

And that's the exciting thing. A part of me seriously hopes Esposito can stick in the NHL next year because it's always fun when scary young talent gets joined by still younger talent (and also because I'd rather have Esposito a part of the Pens' team than spend another year with his QMJHL team and coach, but again, another topic for another time). Another part of me hopes that if the kid, as is true of most-eighteen-year-olds, just isn't ready, that the organization does what's best for him. I hope the organization can wait a few years before, perhaps, he can play a supporting role on a team that, by then, should be a legitimate Cup contender.

But let's cut the kid a break, and ourselves a break, too. He's not Crosby. He's not Malkin. He's not Staal. And we don't want him to be. We've already got Crosby, Malkin, and Staal. What Pens should want is for Angelo Esposito to be Angelo Esposito....and let's wait and see what his "upside" ultimately becomes without ridiculously comparing him to the three out-of-this-world rookies we've been blessed to watch in the span of the past two years.

And if Esposito shocks me, the way Jordan Staal shocked most of us last season, well and good, fair and square, who's going to complain? Only the teams who passed on drafting him.

But, in the more likely scenario that when we watch Esposito, we see flaws or traits that caused him to drop in his draft year (almost a reverse of how Jordan Staal ascended in his draft class), let's just enjoy continuing to watch a Calder Trophy winner and 2 Calder Trophy nominees (one of whom, not incidentally, now has a Hart, Art Ross, and Pearson) without freaking out if our 20th overall pick isn't yet ready to be a Calder Trophy nominee at age 18, 19, or even 20. Let Angelo Esposito be Angelo Esposito, and let's see what happens.

Winners and Losers of the 2007 NHL Draft?

Ask Me in Five--No, Ten--Years

I have always loved the NHL draft. I love to watch the smiles, hugs, and handshakes as teenagers, if only momentarily, realize a lifelong dream. In particular, the first round of the NHL draft is typically great theater. In creative writing terms, there are several dramatic questions to be answered. "Who will go first overall?" "Will there be trades?" "Where will this often injured/fast-rising/falling prospect go?"

Yet the real dramatic question of the NHL draft--"Which of these teenagers will turn into legitimate NHL stars/supporting players/role players?"--is one that cannot, honestly, be accurately assessed until several years after that draft. Which is one of the reasons I absolutely refuse to participate in the whole punditry/blogging/etc. game of assessing the "winners and losers" of a particular entry draft. Because, generally speaking, unless you're drafting a Mario Lemieux, Sidney Crosby, or other once-in-a-generation talent or minimally a franchise talent, you cannot accurately say that you have "won" or "lost" anything. Not yet. Not now.

Now, of course, others would beg to dispute this point with me. For example, Pierre McGuire will insist that the Rangers got a steal at the seventeenth overall pick. Well, maybe, the kid who idolized Jagr is going to end up being a kid who can ultimately replace Jags as the centerpiece of the Rangers. (Though, as an aside, I'd beg Jags not to hang up his skates too soon; I still enjoy watching him play.) Or maybe that kid's not going to be able to replace Jagr but will serve as a wonderful supporting player. Perhaps the kid might have difficulty adjusting to the culture of North America or to the American ice rinks for a few years and not begin to hit his professional stride until he's in his mid-twenties. And, while of course no one wishes this for any player, there's a possibility that something horrible happens when that kid, or any of the kids drafted this year, plays next season, and some type of injury prevents them from becoming a NHL player.

My point in the above paragraph, which could just as easily be applied to the Penguins' pick of Angelo Esposito, is that no one knows. Not really. Not yet. In the cases of Mario, Crosby, and a few others, okay, everyone knows. In other cases, however, well, it takes time. While often it only takes five years to determine that the college kid you took a chance on in a later round is never going to play in the NHL, when it comes to certain other players, I'd rather wait ten years, not five, to evaluate a draft. And as a fan and not a professional scout or general manager, I have this luxury.

Let's examine the case of 2 former Penguins, both Europeans, both the captains of their respective teams.

Case 1: Jaromir Jagr: He was drafted fifth overall in 1990.

Five Years After His Draft Year: He's won his first league scoring title in the lockout-shortened season by scoring more goals than Eric Lindros. We know he's good, but he hasn't quite yet ascended to the level of best hockey player on the planet.

Ten Years After His Draft Year: He's won multiple league scoring championships as well as captured the Pearson and the Hart. He's become the best hockey player in the world, and Craig Patrick, along with Pens' fans, are grateful that four other teams passed on the "risk" that was an eighteen-year-old Jaromir Jagr in the 1990 entry draft.


Case 2: Markus Naslund: He was drafted sixteenth overall in 1991.

Five Years After His Draft Year: Despite obvious talent, Naslund has shown only flashes of scoring ability in the NHL. On March 20, 1996, Craig Patrick trades Naslund to Vancouver for another underachieving former first-round draft pick.

Ten Years After His Draft Year: Maturity and a new setting eventually help Naslund to become the player he was drafted to become. He is the captain of his team and a NHL All-Star.


Examining the cases of Jagr and Naslund--both of whom, whether Pens' fans like it or not, have succeeded as NHL stars at various points in their respective careers--reveals that evaluating a player only five years after his draft year makes for an incomplete evaluation. In the case of Naslund, who fits the moniker "late bloomer" too perfectly, it was twelve years after his draft year when he was voted the NHL's best player by a jury of his peers and won the Pearson Trophy. If you'd judged Jagr after five years, you would have said, "Great pick." If you had judged Naslund after five years, you would have been attempted, as many Pittsburgh hockey fans did at the time, to say, "Bust." But you wouldn't have known just how "great" Jaromir Jagr would become, and you surely never would have anticipated that a player who also initially struggled in Vancouver would become a NHL captain and 1st Team NHL All Star. Which just goes to show you that if it's a stretch to evaluate a draft five years after the fact and that you can still have things to learn ten years after the draft--how utterly silly it is to compose a list of "winners and losers" the day after the draft ends. Let's wait until these children play a NHL game or two, all right, before we start labeling teams as "winners" or "losers," okay?

Of course, NHL general managers and scouting staffs do not have the luxury that I have. In order to evaluate their own draft performance, general managers and scouting teams have to assess their team's draft performance year after year after year. They don't get to say, 10 years later, Oh, we learned from that correct projection and that incorrect projection. They have to evaluate and evaluate and evaluate, and for them, it's a much shorter cycle.

All that being said, of course, unless a team is clearing the last hurdles it needs to capture a Cup, it's silly to hemorrhage assets (e.g. draft picks). In the days that immediately follow a draft, shortsighted quick fixes where draft picks are sacrificed and that ultimately don't move a team into the category of legitimate Cup contender, well, okay, those teams can be called "draft day losers." Minimally, they lost out on adding organizational depth, but perhaps they lost out on a future star. So I'll maintain those short-sighted quick fixes that fail to catapult a team to Cup contender, honestly, are a waste that can result in the short-term label of draft day losers and perhaps longer term label of still losers.

But since I'm not a general manager or a scout, let's be honest and let's be real. The time to ask me about who won and who lost in this draft is going to be, minimally, in 5 years, save for the exceptional, precocious cases of a player or two. And better still, ask me in 10 years.

Except you won't have to ask me. Or anyone else. Because everyone will know. Because we'll know which prospects turned into players.

That's what makes me tune into the NHL draft every summer (aside from being in desperate need of a hockey fix while suffering through another interminable season of losing Pirates baseball). It's fun to remember the kids as prospects and watch those NHL prospects morph into NHL players. It's more fun still because we don't know what will be yet, and somehow, the unknown is always a bit more exciting than what we know.

3rd Period Live-Blogging

As I eat my dinner, I watch Mike Fisher go after the puck like a madman. If only the rest of the Senators could match that all-out effort and desire.

The unfortunate 3rd goal aside, Chris Phillips is still a solid defenseman. His stick breaks, and rather than taking a penalty, he uses his skate and kicks the puck to another Senator. Solid play by a solid player. If only the Senators could get more of that...eh, I don't want the Senators to win, so let's forget that.

Scott Niedermayer for MVP. Niedermayer's shot on net results in another Anaheim goal. 5-2 Anaheim. I do like a three goal lead. I would like a four goal lead better, and a five goal lead better still, and well, you get the idea.

Songs of "Emery, Emery," resound, followed by "We want the Cup! We want the Cup!" Have I mentioned how much I LOVE playoff hockey?

Oh, and prior to the start of the period, the Cup is finally in the building. I don't get to see it yet; it's still inside the case. But the Cup is here. Edzo is talking about where he took the Cup.

The current Anaheim PP aside, waiting for time to tick down when you're in Anaheim's position is.....time lags, every second feels much longer than it is, and--

Penalty Shot! For Ottawa! Still playoff hockey....Jiggy says no. Mike Emerick tells us the Sens still trail by 3.

From my own limited perspective, penalty shots matter. Jaromir Jagr scores on a penalty shot against the Rangers in 1992 was one of the goals that helped the Pens to win a tight game when Mario Lemieux was out with a broken wrist. Ken Wregget had to stop a penalty shot in the "pajama game" of the Pens-Washington game back in 1996. The game wouldn't end with the penalty shot in the 2nd OT; that had to wait until the fourth OT. On the flip side of the coin, Aleksey Morozov failed to score on a penalty shot against the Montreal Canadians. The Pens lost the game, the series, and Morozov. While blaming Morozov's entire North American underachievement on that one unconverted penalty shot is a bit much, that penalty shot made a big difference for the game, the series, and the player. Anyhow, unfortunately for Ottawa, this penalty shot goes to Anaheim, not to them as a "series turning point."


The "We want the Cup" chant starts again, and I concur. Keep playing your game, Anaheim, and watch the seconds tick off the clock...

Memory: My ninth birthday was two days before the Pens won their first Cup. In my third grade naivete, I assumed that all Cup victories would be as lopsided as that 8-0 victory was. As soon as the Pens had put up a couple of goals, the rest of the game felt like a ridiculously long wait. A wait for the Cup. A wait for dreams come true. Ah, the memories.

Clock Check: Seven minutes and thirty three seconds left, and a Senator goes to the penalty box.

Crushing a team's will to win? The Ducks are very, very good, but no team in the Cup Finals should have their will to win crushed. C'mon, you're playing for the Cup. (Note: Yes, I realize it's unlikely, but those tried and true cliches are tried and true for a reason. You play as hard as you can, to the best of your ability, until the buzzer sounds.)

Mike Fisher reference #1,789 (that's what it feels like, anyhow): Either these commentators really like Fisher, like me, or they're seeing what Murray and I are seeing. (Inside my Head Commentary: How in the world are Murray and I seeing the same thing?) Murray comes to his senses and decides to double-shift his best player. Unfortunately for a team with Dany Heatley, Jason Spezza, and Daniel Alfredsson, Mike Fisher has been Ottawa's best player this game and this series.

Memo to Self: I really hope Evgeni Malkin's somewhat lackluster play this postseason was the result of fatigue and needing to adjust to the North American game. This postseason, Sidney Crosby and Jordan Staal weren't as good as they one day will be. But I hope Malkin's issues are ones of needing to adjust and get experience rather than....well....I don't even want to say it yet because it's not fair to put a certain onus on a player as young and inexperienced as Malkin. Draw your own inference.

It's not official yet, but it is: Justice. Alfredsson's pass goes astray, and Perry scores. 6-2 Anaheim with less than 3 minutes to go.

Countdown to the end: The stories come now, and begin by Emerick talking about the joy and sadness that both happen when championship games are won--or lost. The great jubilation of the champions contrasted to the stark sorrow of the team who finished second best. They talk first about the Senators taking pride in a terrific season--true, but how empty that feels at this moment. And now about Randy Carlyle, who played for so many not-so-good (understatement) Pittsburgh teams, finally winning the Cup. And Teemu Selanne, perhaps, possibly, retiring as a champion.

Less than a minute to go. Time to watch the greatest prize in sports get awarded. And enjoy as much of the show as NBC TV will permit me to see.

2nd Intermission Live Blogging

Caveat: While impertinent to readers, I have yet to eat dinner, and I live on the East Coast. Sigh. What playoff hockey does to me. In any case, blogging might not be as frequent.

The Bozos and I agree: On the fact that the line of Schaeffer-Alfredsson-Fisher was the most effective one in the 2nd period. And for all Alfredsson scored that shorthanded goal, I'd take Mike Fisher over Alfredsson any day of the week if I'm a GM who's tasked to build a Cup winner. You need guys like Fisher to win a Cup.

Sigh: This agreeing with the Bozos thing has got to stop. I wasn't listening all that closely to the Bozos' recap of the 2nd period, but I agreed with the basic idea that the Ducks need to keep forechecking and not sit back on a lead and that Ottawa should roll out that Fisher-Alfredsson combo as much as possible. Still, that's scary. But if the 2006-07 season officially concludes tonight, I'll have a whole lot of time next year to go back to disagreeing with the Bozos.

Commercials: Seriously, could they get better commercials for the playoffs? I usually mute commercials, but blogging precludes fussing with the mute button as I usually do. Snark warning: Oh, never mind about the commercials. I just remembered the NHL has a "contract" with NBC that's made me concerned about just how much of the Cup being awarded I'll actually be able to see. Sigh.

Time to Eat. Seriously.

2nd Period Live Blogging

Perhaps to follow up on my 1st intermission post, the announcing team starts heaping praise on Mike Fisher. They praise Fisher for such ordinary things, such to-be-expected-from-leaders things as giving his all and knowing he won't "mail it in". Newsflash for Ottawa: What Fisher shows is called character. Regardless of the fact that a C is not stitched on his chest, you might want to emulate his example if you don't want to watch another team win the Cup this evening.

Teemu Selanne leaves the penalty box. And, for a few minutes, the officials decide to take a break from seeing if they can give Ottawa a chance to get back in the game. A less cynical perspective, or less biased, depending on your own point of view, would say that the Ducks don't take penalties for a few minutes.

The Ducks are getting chances, but have yet to score. Pierre thinks Murray should take a timeout to settle down the Senators. I don't expect Murray to take Pierre's advice. Memo to Ottawa: Finding the character to believe in yourselves and play effectively in the face of a bigger, stronger opponent might be helpful. (Not that I should be providing help to Ottawa.)

Musing: I've always enjoyed the Sounds of the Game segment (partially because usually the tickets that close to the ice were always too expensive for me to purchase). But sometimes I wonder if the NHL should somehow make arrangements to "bleep out" the sometimes colorful language used by players in the midst of exchanges that are enlightening, informative, and entertaining. Let's be honest: Hockey players sometimes use certain language as par for the course. Rather than only give us tidbits of sounds, give us the real stuff. Bleeped out, of course, and nothing too ridiculous. But give us the trash talk and the challenges. Not only does it entertain, it does get fans "inside" the game.

Growl: Just as I'm about to say that if I'm Anaheim, I hate the idea of Daniel Alfredsson playing with Mike Fisher, Alfredsson puts the puck behind Jiggy. Apparently character playing with talent can help talent perform as talent should. But really, who should be wearing the captain's C for Ottawa? And what does it say that Mike Fisher, who I've come to respect but who is not an out-of-this-world offensive talent, is really the best player on the ice? There's something wrong with the Senators, but it's not Mike Fisher.

Tit for Tat: Pierre and Edzo have been bickering throughout the second period. More so than Emerick has been calling the game. More on Pierre and Edzo later. If I feel like it. I might not. They're still nowhere near as laugh-aloud hysterical as were FSN guys Steigy and Errey this year, though.

Wow: Just as things had been turning around for Ottawa, and momentum had swung their way, and it was the Ducks standing still, according to Pierre (I agreed, but I hate saying that), Chris Phillips, pressured by Rob Niedermayer, puts a puck behind Ray Emery. It's a bad luck goal, but luck matters. And momentum shifts.

More Wow: Phillips is another one of those solid character people the Senators actually have (unfortunately two of their star players don't appear to have this--more on that in a second). But the look on his face, the defeated look, the "I can't believe that happened," portends another facial expression, and that's a facial expression of disbelief, one of, "I can't believe we can come back." The Ducks are much better equipped to deal with the Senators than were any of the Eastern playoff teams.

Momentum is a Fragile Thing: Getzlaf loses the puck on the PP, and Alfredsson scores shorthanded. I will never root for Daniel Alfredsson. Amazingly, I think Alfredsson scored without Fisher on the ice with him. Wow.

Momentum is a Fragile Thing, Part 2: In the thirty seconds it took to type the previous sentences (yes, I type fast), Beauchemin scores. Anaheim converts on the PP and has a 2 goal lead once more. Beautiful.

Getzlaf/Carlyle versus Spezza/Murray: Missing person jokes are circulating around the Internet about where Jason Spezza has been throughout the Finals. This period, Pierre informed the viewing audience that Murray was screaming at Spezza and Spezza was screaming right back at his coach. While Murray is right to call out Spezza for certain plays, it's worth remembering Spezza's a kid (not a child, like the Pens' teenagers). Murray needs to do what good coaches do: do whatever's necessary to give a talented kid the chance to succeed. And yes, that means calling Spezza out, screaming if necessary--but it also means, well, things should have taken place before screaming and things should take place after screaming. Those things are called adjustments. Adjustments to a different line or to missing a shift or just to teaching a kid how to play an opponent who plays a style the kid's totally unaccustomed to seeing.

Speaking of kids like Spezza, Ryan Getzlaf is also a kid. Pierre didn't bring us a report about what Carlyle said when Getzlaf got "too cute" and Alfredsson scored, but I wondered. Getzlaf's been called out for taking "stupid" penalties, and perhaps if he had taken a penalty there, Alfredsson doesn't score. I wondered what Carlyle said and how he said it. Because there's a time and a place for call-outs, rebuking, and screaming. But if you're a good coach, a coach who wants to coach a champion, you know you need your best players, even if they're just kids, to be your best players. Say this for the coaches, and I'm not making judgments of the players here: Carlyle has done more with Getzlaf, and gotten more from him, way more, than Murray has with Spezza. And when it comes to kids, that's not just a reflection on the players. It's a reflection on the coaches.

End of Period. 4-2 Anaheim. When do I get to see a picture of the Stanley Cup? Where is the Cup in the building?

Live Blogging -- 1st Intermission

Bozo Ray says the Sens were "brutal." Bozo Brett borrows what he said about the Ducks back on May 20th and says the Sens are terrible, horrible, etc, everywhere.
Note: I loved the flashback to what Bozo Brett said in pregame. That's a nice segment. It adds an entertaining element that's sorely necessary when the Bozos are using such advanced hockey vocabulary as "brutal" and "terrible."


My own analysis: Granted, since I'm not into the rhetoric of certainty, I'm aware that everything I type now could come back and be proved untrue. And yet, well, here it is.

Ottawa was nervous and uptight and not desperate enough in the 1st period. As the Bozos helpfully point out, Murray screaming at the refs just might not be the best way to approach them (even though Ottawa is Canada's capital). But it wasn't just Murray. It was most of the Senators. The big line still hasn't clicked five-on-five for the Sens.

Facing a team replete not just with character, but experienced character, I can't help but wonder, yet again, about Daniel Alfredsson--and particularly about that shot at Scott Niedermayer. Say what you will, but I'm not sure Fisher's answer of "It's everybody" they have to look to is the one a Senators fan should want the team to have. Sure, you want everyone to do their part. But you want your leaders to lead. Unfortunately for the Sens, Daniel Alfredsson showed his "leadership skill" in the waning seconds of the second period of Game 4. The Sens would be better off with a different captain, with a player of whom I could say--the way I say of Scott Niedermayer--"don't boo that guy, he screams class."

In any case, if the Sens don't win this game, it's in large part not just because their best players were beaten by Anaheim's best players but because the character of their best players, or lack thereof, showed out in a negative way.

Just for clarification: I'm not saying every Senators "star" lacks character. I'm not overgeneralizing about the whole of the team. But imagine yourself (I know it's hard) in the shoes of a Senator's fan: Which player on your team has the combination of skill and character that would inspire you to belief? That would inspire his teammates to do their jobs? Perhaps, at some point in the future, it's time for the Senators to find someone, or appoint someone, who can give to the Sens the kind of leadership that Scott Niedermayer has given to the Ducks. (And I'm not talking multiple-Cup wins here. Just old fashioned leadership, the same kind old school guys who hadn't won the Cup to that point--e.g. Bourque, etc.--gave to their teams.)

PERIOD 1 LIVE-BLOGGING

• Ottawa is trying to pull what they pulled in Game 5 of their 1st round playoff series. The Senators are giving Anaheim a chance to win this game in the 1st period. The Senators are the ones taking penalties, and--

• Anaheim is better than the Pittsburgh Penguins. (I also feel the need to note that the Ducks, at least in terms of their blueline, are not just more skilled, but more experienced.) The Ducks score a power play goal to take a 1-0 lead. A Deep Sigh: Oh, what would have been if the Pens had been able to score on one of those power play opportunities early in Game 5 in the 1st round. Oh, the lessons the children hopefully learned. At least the Ducks have already won the same number of games against the Sens as three of the East's best teams combined to win.

• Another Ottawa penalty, but this time, Ottawa kills the penalty. And Chris Pronger, after being hit, is missed. The announcing team analyzes Pronger's absence in detail. The Ducks' PP is out of sync, and Ottawa is breathing slightly easier. A little later, we're informed the equipment trainer is still on the bench, so the inference is made, "it's gotta be medical." My own analysis: Pronger potentially getting injured and leaving the game is one of those things that can happen in hockey games that the pregame Bozos did not account for in their "rhetoric of certainty" guarantee that the Ducks would end the night by lifting the Cup. Further analysis: Pronger's planned absence (e.g. when suspended) is actually easier for the Ducks to deal with--you have a defenseman who's dressed in his place. Going down a defenseman is never easy, and going down a defenseman like Pronger, when you're not physically (another dressed D) or mentally (PP without Pronger) to deal with his absence, could potentially influence who wins this game.

• I agree with Edzo that Scott Niedermayer is great. But I plead with Edzo, please, no, no, no, absolutely no rhyming to tell me how great Niedermayer is. Further Note: Note only does Niedermayer up his game with Pronger out, play solid defense, carry the puck, and dish off effective passes (all in the span of a shift), but he is my Conn Smythe winner at this point. Not merely for his play, but for his maturity and sanity in reminding his team, before the third period of Game 4, that they needed to win the game and not focus on Danny Alfredsson being a punk.

• The Anaheim fans show they watched Game 4 in Ottawa. The Anaheim faithful loudly and beautifully boo Alfredsson every time he touches the puck. I would say Anaheim fans are giving the Senators captain the "Sidney Crosby" treatment, but Daniel Alfredsson should never again be mentioned in the same breath or sentence as Sidney Crosby. (It's impertinent at this point that the Sens beat the Pens in Round 1. Crosby at 19 has more of a clue of how to lead and be a captain than Alfredsson has at 34.) Alfredsson has now gotten into the same "borderline dirty" category as Chris Pronger with that ridiculous shot at Niedermayer, that did, as one of the Bozos noted, ruin his previously pretty much "squeaky clean" persona. And unlike Crosby or Pronger, Alfredsson doesn't necessarily seem like one who'd know to respond to the booing. Further Note: Unlike the way the Ottawa fans booed Niedermayer, I have no qualms with--I actually ENCOURAGE--the Ducks' faithful flock to continue to boo Alfredsson as long and hard and loud as possible.

• Chris Pronger returns to the bench, and the fans applaud. Pierre informs us, again, that in case we couldn't tell from his utter lack of boneheaded plays and consistently strong play, that Mike Fisher is smart. The Ottawa players, of course, turned to see why the fans were applauding, and Pierre diagnoses what Fisher's beautiful (sorry, I am still a female) eyes reveal. The Sens are up against that much more with Pronger back--not just on the bench, but on the ice.

• The Sens are up against way more now. Though the officials are doing their best to give the Sens a chance to get back in this game, Ottawa's not very receptive to the idea of converting on power plays. As an Ottawa PP ends, Rob Niedermayer scores. Beautiful. Anaheim is up 2-0.

• the period ends. While the crowd roars approval of the 2-0 lead, Pierre talks to Mike Fisher. Even though Fisher somehow manages to spout off every hockey cliche in the book (the whole team thing, give it everything they have, etc) in less than a minute, I don't roll my eyes. I can't help it. I'm like Mike Emerick, who appreciates that Fisher is available for interviews at the end of the period. And I can't help but think that if Ottawa's captain had the character of Mike Fisher, the Ottawa Senators would have a much better chance to win the Cup.

Game 5 Live-Blogging

PREGAME

Ah, the beautiful pregame introduction. Emerick narrates and tells me about Ducks fans who have taken the day off work in anticipation of the Cup Finals. Snark: Well, with a 5 p.m. start time, no wonder Ducks fans have to take the day off work. Musing: How much fun will it be for me to take the day off work, with a SPECIFIC PURPOSE in mind (rather than just I felt like it) when MY team is 60 minutes away from the Cup?

Speaking of being 60 minutes away from the Cup, Bill asks Bozo 1 and Bozo 2 if the Ducks that burning question. Both Bozos answer the question in the affirmative: the Ducks will win this game. My own musing: I hate what I once heard termed (in college, yes) "the rhetoric of certainty." Can't we just ENJOY the game without hearing guarantees? Unless those guarantees are going to come from the people who actually decide the game, of course (snark: which hopefully will be the PLAYERS and not the officials).

Pierre asks Danny Alfredsson about shooting that puck at Scott Niedermayer. Danny Alfredsson's answer reveals that he has a future career as a politician somewhere as he claims his shot wasn't deliberate. More frightening than Alfredsson revealing that he has the weasel characteristics that make a politician is the fact that I agree with both Bozos. Brett Hull is right on the money when he says, "Does anyone believe that?" and Ferraro makes the point that 40 goal scorers generally have control over where they shoot the puck. I mean, say what you will for Alfredsson, but a general inability to take accurate shots will not be found in any scouting report of the Ottawa captain.

Pierre talks to Chris Pronger pregame. We all know Chris Pronger is a huge behemoth, but the way Pierre is staring up at him, it really looks like Pierre is purring in his ear. And if one wants to talk about "media bias," well, I think Pierre really does have some affection for Chris Pronger. Not that it matters when it comes to coverage of a hockey game, even the deciding game of the SCF, but Pierre's tone with Prongs was different than his tone with Alfredsson. But then, you know, Pierre once coached Pronger. It's nice for a coach to hope for a former player to succeed. Too bad Murray can't hope for the players he drafted to succeed. Actually, considering it's Murray, it's not bad at all.

A brief tidbit about Ryan Getzlaf, including how Randly Carlyle "rides" him--and "rides" him appears to mean uses him in all situations rather than, you know, "rides" him the way Carlyle has done throughout the year, such as when Getzlaf gets named the game's #1 star and Carlyle still proclaims everything in his game that could and should be improved. (Note: I like both Carlyle and Getzlaf. I actually think the way Carlyle rides Getzlaf, riding in every sense, is more entertaining/interesting/helpful than just praising a young star player. At least I enjoy it.)

3rd Period Live-Blogging

Pierre informs his audience that Pronger and some of the other Ducks not in uniform tonight do not plan to let Daniel Alfredsson get a free pass. Good for them, but a reminder to Pronger and the Anaheim boys: The Cup matters. Win the game on the scoreboard. Keep Alfredsson from getting his hands on the prize.

(Note to self: My "good for them" reveals that my embrace of hockey culture is not as starkly different from that of Cherry or Hull as I would like to delude myself into believing. I might be an American, slightly more refined fan, but a hockey fan who doesn't believe in sticking up for your teammates? You won't find a real one.)

Brad May's "screaming louder" than Pierre has ever heard him scream has helped to result in an Anaheim goal. Pretty. Tic-tac-toe. Or just tic-tac. Selanne to Penner. Emery is mouthing and angry. Also a nice sight.

An aside: During this commercial break, I feel it should be noted that I rooted for the Senators to beat the Devils, and that while I was rooting for Daniel Briere to lift the Cup, I wasn't all that upset that the Senators beat the Sabres. I was especially happy for the 3-year-old child, the Ottawa fan, who recently passed away, who was able to see his Senators win the conference finals. Such a story was heartwarming and uplifting, honestly and truly and really.

But I can't root for the team that booted my Pens from the playoffs to win the Cup. I just can't. And besides, I've always had something of a soft spot for the Finnish Flash. I'd rather see Teemu get his name on the Cup than Daniel Alfredsson.

One-goal Game: Yes, Mike, as much as I love you, I know it's a one-goal game. That's why my heart's racing. And it's not even a deciding game. And my team isn't even playing. If and when (I hope) my Pens get to this point in a couple of/few seasons, I guess I'm going to have to do a lot of push-ups or running in place or jumping jacks so there's some logical reason for my heart to be racing the way it is. And you know what I said about overtime? I'm okay if the game ends 3-2 in regulation. Which probably means it won't. I don't think things generally happen when I say "I'm okay" if something particular happens.

Growl: Did Pierre really just have to say that Jiggy was playing well? It always seems to me these announcers "jinx" goalies. Or maybe that was just Steigy and Errey (FSN Pittsburgh TV guys) this postseason/at times during the regular season. Still, no jinxing, please.

Pierre: Pierre informs us Randy Carlyle has calmed down, a little, when it comes to his kids (I call them kids, not children. The Pens' kids are the only children, said, of course, in fun). He's showing confidence in his players, even the youth. Interesting how coaching tactics, in terms of how a coach relates to players, change from the beginning to the end of the season, and from the regular season to the postseason. Nothing earth-shattering there, just an observation.

Pierre, Take 2: Bonehead Bill McCreary (hmm, like that alliteration, too, as the only bozos can be the commentating team) tells the Anaheim bench to watch their changes. Edzo almost flips (I mean, for Edzo, it's close to flipping), protesting that Anaheim just did a great job with a change. Well, I mean, anything would have to be better than deliberately putting yourself down a man for no apparent reason (Game 3, remember that, anyone?). If Anaheim has 5 players on the ice when they should, that's a good thing. And, snark aside, Penner scoring on Selanne's pass, that was a nice change for Carlyle's Ducks.

Ottawa Time-Out: Growl, Ottawa called a time out. We're under the 2 minute mark, and my heart is racing, and again, these are so not my teams. Time to start working out (having not done that yet today) at least there's an excuse for the racing heart.

Less Than a Minute: And Emery's out of the net. Jiggy makes a save, but there is too much time left. As there always is in a one-goal game. And oh yes, the heart is still racing, and not just because I started doing lunges.

Anaheim players jump up: On their bench, with less than 2 seconds left in the game. And I start jumping with them. I can't help it. I don't like Ottawa's coach or their captain.

Signing off for the night: There will be no live-blogging of NBC's online coverage. Sorry. When it's on TV, then we'll discuss live-blogging that. Speaking of which, the network had dang well better not cut out of the Stanley Cup final presentation. (Talk about low expectations, eh.)

2nd Intermission Live Blogging

Grapes is here. Awesome. Seriously.

--Danny Alfredsson took a slap shot AT Scott Niedermayer? And I missed that with the mute button on? If Alfredsson did that deliberately--good grief. That's nonsense. There's a reason Scottie's a winner of multiple Cups and you're not, Danny.

--If that was deliberate, I'll wait for some other European to captain a Cup winner. I'll take Jagr's Rangers winning the Cup before Alfredsson does. Shooting the puck AT a future Hall of Famer? Are you a punk? Seriously, you must be a punk.

--Brett Hull as NHL commissioner? Don Cherry as NHL commissioner? Well, things could always be worse (and that's not snark, I'm very serious. Seriously.)

--Brett Hull is back to being a blunt Bozo. Memo to Brett: Shields do not make a player weak. Shields do not make a player a pussy, wussy, or whatever else you'd like to say on TV that you can't. Shields should be MANDATORY for players who are entering the league. Protect players' eyes and their eyesight. Use some common sense.

--I'm the older sibling of a goalie. When people are shooting pucks at my brother at ridiculous rates of speed, I like him to have the best equipment possible. As it is, and as a part of hockey, he's still suffered injuries. There is no need to shrink goalie equipment to put NHL goalies, junior goalies, or college goalies, at unnecessary risk. Of course some goalie equipment has been outlandish. But let's be real: Goalies are better now than they used to be. There are fewer goalie positions available, and expansion hasn't diluted the talent pool as much. Likewise, goalies get much better training in technique than they did in previous generations. Shrinking goalie equipment to a point that points goalies at risk for injury is just silly stupidity--and it's also silliness to think that goalies would suddenly stop using technique and studying videotape and staying in shape just because goalie equipment would shrink. Hate to break it to Brett the Bozo, but slightly smaller goalie equipment is not going to result in more goals. It's just not.

--Hull and Grapes think fighting has a place in the game. I agree with them. Fighting is a part of hockey, and honestly, fighting does help to keep players honest. (Georges Laraque has an important role to play on a regular season Pittsburgh team.) However, if, as Hull and Grapes appear to be claiming, the instigator rule scares teams off--okay, fine. But if something egregious (by egregious, I mean dangerous) happens, then a team has to take their lumps which, of course, is a little easier to stomach in the regular season. Of course all of this talk of "keeping order" could be maintained if the referees would just call the rulebook. But you'll have to get back to me when National Hockey League refs actually start calling the rulebook (and yes, that last sentence was entirely snark).

--Grapes and Hull fighting over Alfredsson's goal was hysterical. I loved to watch Brett being razzed about the goal in the crease. But again, in all seriousnes, I'm easily amused. And while usually screaming that has no point (particularly when it's Yinzers talking about Stillers football) bothers me, I was at least mildly entertained. I guess I enjoy watch Bozo Brett being mocked. I also enjoy Grapes being challenged. It's lovely.

--Grapes talks about Chris Neil diving like it's the end of the world. "I mean, when players like Chris Neil start diving..." What? Jaromir Jagr doesn't dive. Players like Chris Neil do dive. Whether Grapes likes it or not, character guys like Chris Neil are not flawless, no matter how well they play the "Canadian" game.

--Brett Hull wants officials with NHL or junior experience. I want officials who actually call the game. Here's the problem, and I've seen it for years because I've been blessed to watch Lemieux, Jagr, and Crosby. (No comments about how spoiled I am. I am aware of the privilege I've had and still have.) With players like Jagr and Crosby, honestly, hooks and trips could be called at least every other shift (and that's putting things mildly). Crosby and Jagr both have the strength to maintain control of the puck and stay upright, for the most part, but penalties go uncalled when players like Crosby and Jagr fail to embellish. It's old news, and I've been screaming about it, at least, since I was twelve (back in 1994). No matter who's on the ice, the officials must be trained to call a hook as a hook or interference or roughing as it is--no matter if the player has the amazing skillset to fight through whatever the illegal play is.

Too often NHL officials are just like the NHL higher-up's. Andy McDonald didn't get hurt; no suspension. Chris Pronger gave an opponent a concussion. The NHL suspended Pronger. The NHL suspended not just for the action but for the result of the action. In games, NHL officials call the result of the action (a player lying on the ice) far too frequently than they actually call what happened. NHL officials have to be trained to see what happens and not just the result (oh, Crosby still has the puck, yawn).

I realize I just said NHL officials have to be trained. Who's doing the training? The NHL. Yeah. Good luck on that. Maybe in.... Oh, let me be real. Grapes or Hull will be commissioner before that happens.

2nd Period Live Blogging Continued

--Phone call. The TV has to be muted.

--The mute button is magic. Andy McDonald scores another goal. Without hearing commentary, I don't think that's a goal the Senators (and Ray Emery) should be giving up.

--Momentum switches fast in the playoffs; this game is by no means over. But you've got to love a goal that hushes a crowd that's already quiet.

--Talk about more switching of momentum. Heatley scores. Growl. I don't like natural goal scorers who are wingers. Particularly because my Penguins do not have them.

--If I'm Anaheim, I'm not happy Alfredsson and Heatley are on the board. If I'm Ottawa, I'm happy they're on the board. And by the way, Chris Pronger's absence is not coincidental when it comes to Heatley and Alfredsson finally getting untracked.

(Still, if Anaheim could somehow pull this out, even with Ottawa's big guys getting untracked, well, that would bode well. I would think.)

--End of the period festivities. Lots of grabbing and talking. And to that Ottawa buffoon bothering Scott Niedermayer, leave Scott Niedermayer alone. He's better than you. He's above you. Leave Scott Niedermayer alone.

--Eventually the players depart for their respective locker rooms. And Scott Niedermayer starts "talking." Sure, that's what he's doing. Did I not tell that Senator to let Scott Niedermayer be Scott Niedermayer? I mean. Really.

--Tied at 2 all after 2. Maybe I get overtime tonight? Pretty, pretty please?

Period 2 -- Live Blogging

The Lecture: Now Bill McCreary decides to tell Ray Emery that flopping outside of his crease in unacceptable. I wonder what Ryan Getzlaf thinks about that? Somehow I think Sidney's Crosby favorite word (at least the one he's typically caught on camera saying) is probably involved. Good thing no one's got a camera on Getzlaf. Wouldn't be family friendly TV.


Referee Rant: I don't like Bill McCreary. Never have. Come to think of it, I'm not sure I've ever liked an official. Maybe it's because I also rooted for the Mario or Jagr-led Pens, who were never really, to put it mildly, the darlings of referees. The only official I ever liked was one Kevin Collins, a linesman who officiated some of big-time Pens' games, and who I nicknamed Curtis just because, well, he looked like a Curtis.

(Note to self and to anyone who's reading: In any case you hadn't figured it out by now, I'm a little goofy/crazy/other synonyms, and there's no snark involved in that.)

But seriously, I liked Curtis (Kevin Collins) because he always just did his job. He dropped the puck. He called off-sides when it was supposed to be called. He broke up fights.

When it comes to Curtis, though, I never noticed him because he was NOT doing his job. Curtis was always just a part of the game. The game wasn't about Curtis; Curtis was a part of ensuring the game ran smoothly. And most games with Curtis--and not just because the Pens won--did run smoothly.

If I could wish upon a star.....the NHL standard would be Curtis. Officials who call the game right and do their jobs and as such, we only notice them as part of the game--not as the ones who decide the game. Were I to dream, dream, dream, dream....



Baseball Jokes: Ha, ha, ha. Mike Emerick, like me, roots for the pathetic Pirates, who I think are still in contention in the Comedy Central Division in the NL despite a sub .500 record. Edzo jokes about the Pirates' bullpen (it's been VERY BAD lately, blowing leads here and there and everywhere). Yeah, I know it's irrelevant to the game. But these guys know each other and get along and I got the joke and--wow, I'm praising the announcers.

Must. Stop. Now.


Thank you, Mr. Emerick: For apologizing when you made a mistake. Rather than insisting you were right. Players, coaches, and general managers, not to mention on-ice and off-ice bigwigs, could learn a lot from you. When you thought a call was a goal, you didn't insist that it was. You apologized. Thank you for setting a remarkable example. I (no snark here) seriously encourage others in the hockey world to follow Mr. Emerick's example.

Shot Clock Update: The Ducks came to play in Period 2, or they channelled all that rage in the right direction, or something, at least that's what the shot clock says. The momentum has shifted in this period...for how long?

Goal: Andy McDonald, whom Brian Burke, who used to have Colin Campbell's job, jumped so vigorously to protect, scores a goal.

Tie Game. Yeah. The Senators crowd is quiet. Beautiful.

1st Intermission Live-Blogging

"Replacing Pronger": C'mon. Let's be honest. This is what happens with a suspension to a star player, or an injury to a star player. Someone, or many someones in this case, have to take this certain star player's ice time. But these players will not, cannot, and should not be expected to "replace" Chris Pronger. Do you want Ric Jackman trying to dish out a nasty check when he clearly has no concept of how to do that and remain in appropriate defensive position? Duh. Of course not. You want your players who are replacing your star player to play to the best of their abilities, within, of course, their limitations. While I was too busy blogging to pay a ton of attention to the defenseman the Bozo's the Clown called out, I usually diagnose this problem as a player trying to do too much and then not doing what he can do. Beauchemin needs to play within his limitations and not pretend to be someone (cough, Chris Pronger, cough) he isn't.

"We're going to keep playing the same way": Chris Pronger gives Anaheim an edge that the team maintains even when Pronger isn't on the ice. However, I'm not sure that it's wise, e.g., in Anaheim's case, to continue to make the plays that referees are calling as penalties. When a key cog in the wheel is missing, other adjustments have to be made to ensure the bike can still function. (Snark to myself: Yes, that's a horrible analogy. Deal with it.) And perhaps for Anaheim that might need to be tweaks to the basic approach (tweaks, not a wholesale overhaul) in order to give the Prongerless Ducks a better shot at winning.

Oh, dear, I am going to break a record: Bozo Brett is far more blunt than I am. But I agree with Brett's basic premise. For all I could rightfully criticize certain Anaheim Ducks, the men in stripes were probably the worst offenders, when it comes to doing their jobs well, during the first period.

Scott Niedermayer: The Bozos praise Scotty. How could not? His name is Scott. He plays defense. He's a future Hall of Famer. Oh, yeah, and he played like such. Nice job, Scottie. Still, if you and Jiggy are the only ones who come to play, I think this series shifts back to Anaheim tied at 2. But the announcers and I agree again (seriously: this is NOT that common).

Don Cherry Preview: I am promised Don Cherry is coming. Good. Grapes and I rarely agree on anything. (I love Jordan Staal, too, but I still think Evgeni Malkin should win the Calder Trophy.) The Bozos joke about Cherry's suits. It's kind of funny. You know, if ex-hockey players discussing wardrobe/attire issues is funny to you. I'm pretty easy to amuse.