Player	Team	Acquired	Departed
Kyle Chipchura		Draft (1/18, ’04)	Trade (ANA, ’09): for 4/??? ’11
Saku Koivu		Draft (1/21, ’93)	FA (ANA, ’09)
Chris Chelios		Draft (2/40, ’81)	Trade (CHI, ’90): with 2/39 ’91 (M. Pomichter) for D. Savard
Ron Hainsey		Draft (1/13, ’00)	Waivers (CBJ, ’05)
Steve Begin		Waivers (BUF, ’03)	Trade (DAL, ’09): for D. Janik
Mark Recchi		Trade (PHI, ’95): with 3/74 ’95 (M. Hohenberger) for E. Desjardins, G. Dionne, and J. LeClair	Trade (PHI, ’99): for D. Zubrus, 2/58 ’99 (M. Carkner) and 6/172 ’00 (S. Selig)
Michael Ryder		Draft (8/216, ’98)	FA (BOS, ’08)
Craig Rivet		Draft (3/68, ’92)	Trade (SJS, ’07): with 5/146 ’08 (J. Demers) for J. Gorges and 1/22 ’07 (M. Pacioretty)
Craig Conroy		Draft (6/123, ’90)	Trade (STL, ’96): with P. Turgeon and R. Fitzpatrick for M. Baron, S. Corson, and 5/122 ’97 (G. Razin)
Christopher Higgins		Draft (1/14, ’02)	Trade (NYR, ’09): with R. McDonagh and P. Valentenko for S. Gomez, T. Pyatt, and M. Busto
Tom Kostopoulos		FA (LAK, ’07)	FA (CAR, ’09)
Sergei Samsonov		FA (EDM, ’06)	Trade (CHI, ’07): for J. Cullimore and T. Salmelainen
Christobal Huet		Trade (LAK, ’04): with R. Bonk for M. Garon and 3/95 ’04 (P. Baier)	Trade (WSH, ’08): for 2/45 ’09 (J. Morin, ATL)
Brett Clark		Draft (6/154, ’96)	Expansion Draft (ATL, ’99)
Darcy Tucker		Draft (6/151, ’93)	Trade (TBL, ’98): with S. Richer and D. Wilkie for P. Poulin, M. Vukota, and I. Ulanov
Mathieu Garon		Draft (2/44, ’96)	Trade (LAK, ’04): with 3/95 ’04 (P. Baier) for R. Bonk and C. Huet
Mike Ribiero		Draft (2/45, ’98)	Trade (DAL, ’06): with 6/176 ’08 (M. Tassone) for J. Niinimaa and 5/142 ’07 (A. Conboy)
Stephane Robidas		Draft (7/164, ’95)	Waivers (ATL, ’02)
Doug Janik1		Trade (DAL, ’09): for S. Begin	FA (DET, ’09)
Sheldon Souray		Trade (NJD, ’00): with J. DeWolf and 2/61 ’01 (A. Holmqvist, TBL) for V. Malakhov	FA (EDM, ’07)
Tomas Vokoun		Draft (9/226, ’94)	Expansion Draft (NSH, ’98)
Raitis Ivanans		FA (AHL, ’04)	FA (LAK, ’06)
Guillaume Latendresse		Draft (2/45, ’05)	Trade (MIN, ’09): for B. Pouliot
Francis Bouillon		FA (IHL, ’98)	Waivers (NSH, ’02)
		Waivers (NSH, ’02)	FA (NSH, ’09)
Ben Guite1		Draft (7/172, ’97)	FA (NYI, ’01)
Yann Danis		FA (NCAA, ’04)	FA (NYI, ’08)
Dainus Zubrus		Trade (PHI, ’99): with 2/58 ’99 (M. Carkner) and 6/172 ’00 (S. Selig) for M. Recchi	Trade (WSH, ’01): with T. Linden and 2/61 ’01 (A. Holmqvist, TBL) for R. Zednik, J. Bulis, and 1/25 ’01 (A. Perezhogin)
Mark Streit		Draft (9/262, ’04)	FA (NYI, ’08)
Donald Brashear		FA (QMJHL, ’92)	Trade (VAN, ’96): for J. Cullimore
Corey Locke1		Draft (4/113, ’03)	Trade (MIN, ’08): for S. Belle
Matt Carkner		Draft (2/58, ’99)	FA (SJS, ’01)
Alexei Kovalev		Trade (NYR, ’04): for J. Balej and 2/51 ’04 (B. Graham)	FA (OTT, ’09)
Michael Leighton		Waivers (PHI, ’07)	Trade (CAR, ’07): for 7/192 ’07 (S. Kishel)
Robert Lang		Trade (CHI, ’08): for 2/32 ’10 (J. Knight, BOS)	FA (PHX, ’09)
Mathieu Schneider		Draft (3/44, ’87)	Trade (NYI, ’95): with K. Muller and C. Darby for P. Turgeon and V. Malakhov
Jay Leach1		Waivers (NJD, ’09)	Waivers (SJS, ’09)
Matt d’Agostini		Draft (6/190, ’05)	Trade (STL, ’10): for A. Palushaj
Alex Tanguay		Trade (CGY, ’08): with 5/138 ’08 (M. Trunev) for 1/25 ’08 (G. Nemisz) and 2/49 ’09 (S. Elliott, COL)	FA (TBL, ’09)
Francois Beauchemin		Draft (3/75, ’98)	Waivers (CBJ, ’04)
Andre Deveaux		Draft (6/182, ’02)	FA (TBL, ’04)
Mikhail Grabovski		Draft (5/150, ’04)	Trade (TOR, ’08): for G. Pateryn and 2/32 ’10 (J. Knight, BOS)
Mike Komisarek		Draft (1/7, ’01)	FA (TOR, ’09)
Jose Theodore		Draft (2/44, ’94)	Trade (COL, ’06): for D. Aebischer

¹ Not currently on active roster.

The final tally, at the end of the playoffs:

• 1 team has four (TOR)
• 1 team has three (BOS)
• 11 teams have two (ANA, ATL, CGY, CAR, COL, DAL, NSH, NJD, NYR, OTT, PHX)
• 14 teams have one (BUF, CHI, CBJ, DET, EDM, FLA, LAK, MIN, NYI, PHI, SJS, STL, TBL, WSH)
• 3 teams have none (MTL, PIT, VAN)

A much more even spread than we saw with the Oilers, excepting the fact that the two teams with the most ex-Habs are the team’s two traditional rivals, Toronto (four!) and Boston (three). Worst of all, all four ex-Hab Leafs are Habs picks, though to be fair, two of them (Beauchemin and Deveaux) combined for one game in le tricolore, so it’s not so bad. Additionally, only one active player has recorded two separate stints as a Hab — Francis Bouillon, who did a bit of waiver-swapping with Nashville back in ’02. At some point in the summer, I may yet look back on how players left each team, and see if there’s anything useful to be learned from it (probably not without a bigger sample, but I’m not sure I’m interested in doing this for a third team). I may keep on keeping track, so…check back in October? Maybe?

Finally, since the playoffs, we’ve already had movement on two guys:

Player	Team	Acquired	Departed
Jaroslav Halak		Draft (9/271, ’03)	Trade (STL, ’10): for L. Eller and I. Schultz
Sergei Kostitsyn		Draft (7/200, ’05)	Trade (NSH, ’10): with futures for D. Boyd, D. Ellis, and futures

Doogie	Hoop	Matt	Gerard	Result
4-1	4-1	4-2	4-1	4-2
1-0	1-0	1-0	1-0	W-L
1	1	0	1	GO
8-7	11-4	7-8	8-7	W-L
36	28	35	36	GO
1	4	4	0	PS

You may notice the extra row at the end. Because Gerard and I perfectly tied, the second tiebreaker had to come out, and I arbitrarily selected perfect series. Not because it gave me second place (that was a happy accident), but because it was the only damned thing I had left that I’d tracked.

That sixth game was an absolute classic. It’s a bit of a shame, in a way, that the final goal was a touch anticlimactic, with the delayed reaction of everyone in the building not named Patrick Kane. Then again, there’s something pure and enjoyable about Kane’s whoop of joy being the only sign that the ‘Hawks had just won the Cup for damned near five seconds. Still, the game itself was entertaining pretty much from start to finish: even when the ‘Hawks tried to sit on their lead in the third, they got a few quality chances, and did more by sound positioning than they did by playing that Godforsaken dump and chase that most teams do when they defend a late lead.

The goaltending was awful, sure (neither ‘keeper had a SV% over .900, and the series was the third-highest scoring Final of all-time), but overall, I can’t complain one bit about the quality of the series. What many in the hockey world –including three of us — expected to be a coronation turned out to be a heck of a series with a number of lead changes, history in the making (Briere’s 12 points, one off Gretzky’s record, and 30 points on the playoffs, besting Brian Propp for the Flyers record), and defining moments, the kind of series that wouldn’t have been possible a few years ago (remember the slogfests of the early aughts?). Plus, Game 6 was apparently the highest-rated NHL game since the mid-70s. It did the unthinkable and outdid the NHL’s dream matchups of the last two years in pretty much every way. It’s too bad the salary cap is going to ravage this Chicago team over the summer: I’d love to see more of this next year.

Doogie	Hoop	Matt	Gerard	Result
4-2	4-2	4-2	4-3	4-1
4-2	4-2	4-3	4-3	4-0
1-1	1-1	2-0	1-1	W-L
7	7	4	7	GO
7-7	10-4	6-8	7-7	W-L
35	27	35	35	GO

Thankfully, we no longer have Montreal around to gum up the works yet again. This time, it’s just two teams, and hopefully a pretty straightforward selection. Fair warning: Hoop and I wrote novels. The important bits, as always, are in bold.

So of course, the first game where most of the ‘Hawks play like the ‘Hawks, and I miss it. Ah, well. Wednesday!

Stanley Cup Finals

(3) Chicago vs. (18) Philadelphia

Playoff History: The only previous meeting between the ‘Hawks and the Flyers came in the first round of the 1971 playoffs, when Chicago polished off the nascent Broad Street Bullies in four straight en route to their fourth Finals appearance in 11 years.

1971 QF
4-0

Stanley Cup History: The ‘Hawks have not exactly led a charmed life, winning just three Stanley Cups, the fewest of any Original Six team, and none since 1961, the longest active drought. They were also tied with the Rangers for the fewest Final series appearances by an Original Six team prior to this year, at ten. In fact, since making five appearances in 13 years during the Hull-Mikita-Esposito era (1961-73), the ‘Hawks had only been back to the Finals once, and that year, they ran into a buzzsaw.

1931	1934	1938	1944	1961	1962	1965	1971	1973	1992
2-3	3-1	3-1	0-4	4-2	2-4	3-4	3-4	2-4	0-4

Since the Broad Street Bullies’ reign of terror was silenced spectacularly by the Montreal Canadiens in 1976, the Flyers have become perennial Stanley Cup bridesmaids: they’ve now lost five consecutive Final series, and won only six games in the process, half of which came in the 1987 classic against Edmonton.

1974	1975	1976	1980	1985	1987	1997
4-2	4-2	0-4	2-4	1-4	3-4	0-4

Season Series: The only meeting of the year between the ‘Hawks and Flyers came on March 13, a 3-2 win for the Flyers. Scott Hartnell tied the game with just over two minutes to play, then Chris Pronger scored the winner with just three seconds to go. Michael Leighton made 39 saves — and scored an assist — in the victory.

Doogie Says: The minute the Canadiens eliminated the Penguins in round two, I knew that the Stanley Cup champion was going to come from the West and that it probably wasn’t going to be even close, simply because the East, as a whole, is a shitty conference, and of all the teams there, the only ones that could hope to compete with a Western club had all been polished off by the underdogs. Washington, New Jersey, and Buffalo were all gone early, and with Pittsburgh following soon after, it was down to Montreal, Boston, and Philly, all of whom had made the playoffs in the last week, and none of whom exactly screamed contender.

I do fear that I may have underestimated the Flyers a bit. Certainly, I should’ve seen them coming last round, knowing how many games the Habs had played, and how the Flyers play, and how they’d underachieved due to goaltending injuries throughout the regular season. (I maintain that Ray Emery playing through an abdominal tear directly resulted in the firing of John Stevens back in December.) While they looked dead in the water in round two, with injuries to three important players in Gagne, Carter, and Laperriere, they outlasted the Bruins and staged that epic comeback, thanks in part to Simon Gagne making his dramatic comeback, and Michael Leighton stepping in flawlessly for injured Brian Boucher. Controlling the passive Habs four games out of five proved all too easy after that, especially with Laperriere and Carter making their way back in Game 4.

Yet ultimately, that’s precisely why I can’t lend too much credence to the Flyers as Finalists. Not to denigrate any of their accomplishments, but really, who did they beat? A New Jersey team they’d owned all year (5-1 in the regular season, 4-1 in the playoffs), an offensively inept Bruins team that lost what little it had when Krejci went down to injury, and a passive Canadiens squad that controlled the play exactly one game out of five. Colour me unimpressed. Furthermore, in that one game they did steal, the Habs showed us precisely how you beat the Flyers: move through the neutral zone with speed, dump and chase, forecheck aggressively, force the Philly defence to take penalties. Guess what the ‘Hawks are really good at?

Chicago’s had the much tougher road — Nashville is harder than anyone the Flyers faced, save maybe New Jersey, and it got meaner from there — and in the process of getting here, they’ve had their captain best the franchise record for single-season playoff points streak (13) and tie the franchise record for any playoff points streak, and tied an NHL record with seven consecutive road wins. They have superior skill at just about every position, save maybe goal, and as these playoffs have proven, you don’t need a great goalie to win it all, just good enough. They’ll test Michael Leighton (and Brian Boucher, should he make an appearance) far more than any of New Jersey, Boston, or Montreal did on a far more consistent basis. They’re just the better team all around, and I’ve seen nothing in any of the countering predictions to date that’s swayed me in the slightest. Philly can ride Leighton to victory in a single game, just like they did in the regular-season meeting mentioned above, but the bottom line is, Chicago is simply too much for anyone to handle. ‘Hawks win it in five, ending the longest active Stanley Cup drought and second-longest in NHL history, at 49 years.

Hoop Says: Let’s start in goal for both teams and it’s not exactly what you would call an elite goaltender match up with Antti Niemi for the Blackhawks and Michael Leighton/Brian Boucher for the Flyers. (Yes, I suspect we will see both Flyers goalies in the final) Niemi has been solid throughout the playoffs for the Hawks but never spectacular in my opinion. Leighton just came off what had to be the easiest three shut out performance in a series in the history of the sport. Needless to say I am not convinced at all in the Flyers goaltending as much as I am impressed by the Flyers defense corps. Advantage Hawks

Moving on to the defense for both teams, and this is a great match up! The Hawks’ top pair of Keith and Seabrook will have the task of shutting down the Richards line, while the pair of Chris Pronger and whatever stiff they throw out with him for the next shift [ed: Matt Carle at EV, Kimmo Timmonen on the PP] will be against the Toews line. It may be a bit of a cold hearted way to look at it, but from what I have seen it is true. Pronger is the Conn Smythe nominee for the Flyers with no hesitation in my mind, and he will see a lot of the Hawks’ nominee, Jonathan Toews. The Hawks can easily go five deep on the blue line while I think Pronger will have to play 45 minutes a night to give the Flyers a chance. Advantage Hawks

Moving up front, the Flyers’ Mike Richards has been great all post season for Philly. Philadelphia has also gotten some great play out of Claude Giroux, and Simon Gagne does pose enough of a threat that the Hawks’ D will have their hands full. Now you look at the Hawks and these guys are three lines deep and also have a solid fourth line. I am curious how the Flyers will try and handle Dustin Byfuglien in front of their net. The Sharks’ theory of “leave him alone” certainly did not work. I suspect that by the time this series is over, Byfuglien and Pronger will have a good hate for each other going. I just can’t see how the Flyers’ D will be able to hold up to the depth of skill Chicago brings to the table. Advantage Hawks

Now let’s take a look at the intangibles, starting with home ice advantage. Both teams have tough barns to play in and both should be rocking the entire playoffs. Listen to how noisy it gets in Philly when they play the Kate Smith rendition of God Bless America. The lid may come off that building! The Hawks’ home crowd is nothing to sneeze at either. When that horn goes and they play the stupid (yes, I said it) Chelsea Dagger song after a goal and I think there will be a few. The Madhouse on Madison will be exactly that. But the Flyers could have destiny on their side being the first team to come back from 3-0 down in 35 years to win a series. However, Mike Richards touched the Prince of Wales trophy so that gets wiped out with that curse [ed: Even though Crosby touched it last year?]. That being said, there is some magic in Philadelphia right now. Advantage Flyers

To wrap it up, I just can’t see a way the Flyers can win this series short of a few Hawks getting injured, or I am incorrect about the Flyers goaltending and they pull off another miracle. I also look at who the Flyers beat in New Jersey, Boston, and Montreal and none of those teams are even close to what Chicago will bring to the table. If Chicago can avoid over confidence then they should roll in this series. The funny thing is I would not be shocked to see Philadelphia win game 1 for that reason and for that reason alone I can’t pick a sweep. Your Stanley Cup Champions for 2009-2010 are…

The Chicago Blackhawks in 5 games

I will take Jonathan Toews as the Conn Smythe winner.

Matt Says: This is a tough one…I’m going to say six games. My gut reaction was the Hawks, simply because, contrary to my pick here (What was I thinking? Brainwashed by my ‘Nucklehead roommate, I guess.), they’ve always been a team I cheered for and enjoyed watching play. But, they’re also overall a smaller team, especially against a team like Philly. And as Doogie mentioned, Philly is getting healthier. Leighton is on a roll, and no matter how poorly the Canadiens played, three shutouts in five games, something is going right…

I have a gut feeling I’m going to regret this, but I’m going to go with my initial gut reaction, and say Hawks in six. Let’s see if I can go from 0 and 4, to 2 and 0, and back to 0 and 1.

Gerard Says: Hawks in 5 due to my confusing predictions of the last round.

1. Conklin is not in the Conference Finals/Finals for the first time since the lockout. He always loses (sometimes actively making his team lose) and has the Conklin Curse.
2. Hossa has shared the last two (losing) teams with Conklin and as such is either a victim of the Conklin Curse or has caught it himself.
3. Loser of the Winter Classic who beat the winner of the Winter Classic to continue.
4. The winner of the Winter Classic has lost the Stanley Cup Finals in the last two years.
5. The winner of this year’s Winter Classic lost to the Flyers (the losers of this year’s Classic) in a loss so epic one may as well call it a transference of Winter Classic powers. [Ed: Or put more succinctly, the visitor in the Winter Classic has made the Finals every year so far -- and lost every year so far.]
6. Philly has stupid Pronger face and haven’t had a goaltender to get behind since Hextall.
7. Byfuglien is really fun to say phonetically, and will likely be a word Leighton is reading over and over while in net.

Chicago will win in 5. And if they don’t, I’m blaming it on the Conklin Curse.

Though I do look forward to Byfuglien knocking out Pronger’s teeth.

	6	2	3	3	7	4	4
	5	1	4	5	4	3	2

So first the “kinda” part. It continues to feel to me tremendously unfair that we dispatched the Wheaties rather handily in the playoffs, winning four straight after dropping the first game, then beat them again quite handily in the round robin (to the tune of 5-1, all goals in the first), and still had to beat them again in order to advance. I knew going into Friday’s game that it was going to be a squeaker, and I wasn’t going to be surprised at all if the Hitmen lost. Why? Because they’d just punted the Wheaties pretty hard, they were gonna come back pissed, and I wasn’t convinced the Hitmen were going to be able to get up for yet another battle against a repeatedly vanquished foe. Sure enough, three minutes and change into overtime, there they were, looking on in disbelief as the host team earned a free pass for the right to get skullfucked by the once and future kings (again). It was like a scene in a zombie movie, where one of the secondary heroes thinks he’s killed the zombie, but it pops back up again, so he puts a decisive round into its head, starts to walk away in that action-movie sort of way…then gets ripped to shreds by that same fucking zombie. Except not funny, because my team was the guy who got torn to hell.

I went over it in my head a hundred times. Why the hell should Brandon get a free pass? It’s not like they lost a hard-fought WHL Final or anything: they got schooled in the semis, for crying out loud! They’d lost to Calgary and Windsor, the consensus favourites by a mile, by a combined 14-4 in the round-robin. They had no business being there at all, and it showed in the final score of the final game (9-1 Windsor). Shouldn’t there be some way to remove the Wheaties from the process altogether? I dunno, make the Final a best-of-three between the top two teams. You still get your minimum-two-but-maybe-three games for gate receipts and TV ratings, and it seems like a much fairer gauge of who the best team in all the land truly is. Or maybe the hosts shouldn’t get a free pass if they don’t make their respective League Final. Something. Anything’s got to be better than this travesty of a result.

Then I stopped and reflected on the tournament as a whole, and came to a realization: the Hitmen simply didn’t play well enough. They got down 0-3 in each of their first two games, mounting a comeback against Moncton and losing 6-2 to Windsor. They became completely passive in their final round-robin game against Brandon after the first, then simply had no answer for Brandon’s tenacity in the semis. (These two things may or may not be related, depending on how you view momentum in a game.) I wasn’t scared of facing Windsor, as such: I maintain that we could’ve beat them, and if nothing else kept the score close. But I do wonder if we really deserved to win, regardless. Having two or three good periods in a tournament we should have dominated is no way to earn the right to play for the prize. Jones wasn’t good enough, the defence wasn’t good enough, the discipline wasn’t good enough, and outside the Jimmy Bubnick-Tyler Shattock-Kris Foucault line, the scorers weren’t good enough. Sure, we were missing Brandon Kozun, but that’s not an excuse: we were still three lines deep in offensive talent. They weren’t aggressively bad, or anything, they just weren’t at their best for most of the tournament, and it showed.

Still, even if we biffed our second consecutive chance to be crowned kings of junior hockey — and possibly the last for several years, given the amount of turnover likely to occur this summer — there’s a ton to be proud of. Two World Junior representatives, both of whom took home awards for their work at their respective positions: Kozun as the nation’s top scorer, Martin Jones as the West’s top goalie and MVP of the conference and league finals (Edit: and top goalie of the Memorial Cup). First overall in the League, for the second year in a row. The first 1-3 comeback in five years (since we ourselves were turfed by none other than those fucking Wheat Kings). Pasting the League’s best offensive team and the presumptive favourites by winning the goalie battle in spectacular fashion. Winning our first WHL title since the days of Moran, Brendl, and Fomitchev. The final result may not have been what was desired, but there’s a hell of a lot to be proud of here, and as the bitterness and pain fade, there are a lot of fond memories to look back on, and when we raise four more banners to the rafters of the Saddledome in late September, those will be the things that we as fans should focus on, not the resentment and disappointment of a single loss, off a single goal.

For the last time, congratulations to the 2009-10 Calgary Hitmen, and thanks for the memories.

After a lot of thinking, I’m beginning to feel like they’re right, at least to some degree, for a couple of reasons. For one, the talent disparity that we used to see in evidence whenever the Montreal Canadiens played, say, the Kansas City Scouts is largely gone. Yes, at the extremes, there’s still a clear difference between good and bad — anyone who’s seen a Blackhawks-Oilers game in the last two years can attest to that — but on an average night, the difference between two teams is much more granular than it’s ever been. Part of that is due to improved scouting, as teams scour not just the wilds of Canadian junior, but European junior and pro leagues, American college and high-school, and even occasionally (though all-too-rarely) Canadian university hockey. Good players are everywhere, and while you can question the decision-making and efficency of some teams, there’s no question that most of the stones are at least getting turned over, and that there’s talent to be found under every one of them. There’s also the fact that coaching, athletic training, and psychological training are much better now than they’ve ever been. Players get feedback on what they did wrong, can see the video of the error for themselves, and know what to do for next time. Guys can spend a dozen hours or more per week in the gym, building their aerobic base and their strength. Players learn how to deal with hostile crowds, can talk to trained professionals about their confidence and about off-ice issues that can prove to be a distraction. All of this leads to the average NHLer being much more skilled, fit, and resilient than they’ve ever been, and there’s much less disparity between the best and worst in at least the last two categories — and arguably the first, as well — than we’ve ever seen. And then, of course, we have the redistribution of talent brought about by the salary cap, which teams are still learning the ins and outs of five years later. All of this leads to a situation where it’s much more likely that the outcome of a game, for example, can hinge on a fortuitous bounce one way or the other, because on any given night, there’s not that much to choose from, relative to 30 or 40 years ago.

The other main reason is that high-level hockey seems to be a barely-controlled chaotic system, which I think is a product of the way the game’s developed over the last half-century or so. In that time, we’ve seen the introduction of the slap shot, drastic changes to goalie equipment and play style, meaningful east-west play, heavy shot-blocking, composite sticks, and mid-air redirection of the puck as an intentional play, to name just a few things. Many of these changes come in a sort of delayed chain-reaction. Slap shots begat changes in goalie equipment. Changes in goalie equipment combined with the butterfly style led to much more shot-tipping. The evolution of the modern east-west game — not just skating up and down your lanes, but cutting across the ice and creating holes through both skating and puck movement — started by the Winnipeg Jets of the 1970s and perfected by the Edmonton Oilers of the 1980s, made it difficult to play man-to-man defence, especially for the more lumbering brutes of the defensive trade, necessitating more shot- and pass-blocking, from all members of the lineup. Combine these changes with worsening ice conditions — especially in warmer climes and during the latter stages of the playoffs, as the weather gets warmer everywhere — and increased overall athleticism — leading not only to faster players and more violent collisions, but more abuse to the aforementioned ice through the course of a game — and the puck winds up spending much of its time hopping here, there, and everywhere, rolling, flipping, on end, what have you. Sometimes unpredictable things happen like, say, the puck hitting a rut on its way in from centre ice and hopping over a goalie’s glove, or a puck pinballing in off three sets of legs in front of the net. At a certain point, physics takes over and there’s little you can do to predict it.

All of which leads me to last night’s game between the Hitmen and the Spitfires. Sure, it ended 6-2 Windsor, and appeared for all the world, from the boxscore, to be the coronation of the first Memorial Cup repeat in 15 years. If they can abuse the only team that appeared to be any real competition to them going in, what hope does anyone else have? Except when you actually watch the game, it becomes clear that bounces played a huge role in the final outcome. The first Windsor goal came off a Michael Stone shot-block: the puck bounced just under his ankle, in the tiny space that was there, and fooled Martin Jones. The second, just a minute or so later, deflected off the stick of a backchecking Ben Wilson. It’s 2-0 five minutes in, a hole from which the Hitmen never recovered, but it was off two unfortunate bounces. From there, I felt it was actually a fairly evenly-played game, with both teams getting their share of the bounces: a shot that rang off both posts behind Martin Jones and out at one end, a tip by Matt MacKenzie going two inches wide because the puck started rolling mid-pass at the other, and so forth. A ton of close calls that could’ve been in or out, based on ever-so-slight variances in human performance — so small as to be irreproducable — or the condition of the ice or what have you. From the four-minute mark of the first to the 19-minute mark of the third, the balance of scoring was 3-2 Windsor. That was the game I saw, and that game in no way resembled the 6-2 final scoreline.

Sure, some nights a team gets outplayed, full stop…but others, the bounces go the other guys’ way and obscure the balance of play. Maybe I’m being a blinkered fan here, and maybe I’m not lending enough credence to score effects, but what I saw last night was a team that could compete with the best in major junior, that suffered just a couple of breakdowns, but otherwise played an admirable road game without their best forward. If they play Windsor again on Sunday, with Brandon Kozun healthy enough to play, I see no reason to think that they can’t win the Memorial Cup. That doesn’t mean that they will, of course, but it does mean that the gap between the Windsor Spitfires and the Calgary Hitmen is not what yesterday’s score would have you believe.

Doogie	Hoop	Matt	Gerard	Result
4-2	4-1	4-2	4-2	4-3
4-3	4-2	4-2	4-1	4-3
4-2	4-3	4-1	4-3	4-1
4-2	4-2	4-3	4-1	4-2
1-3	3-1	0-4	2-2	W-L
10	7	15	10	GO
6-6	9-3	4-8	6-6	W-L
28	20	31	28	GO

Actually, to be perfectly fair, Matt’s picks were identical to those of one Robert McKenzie, so it’s a bit unexpected to see things blow up that badly. Also, given how Boston-Philly turned out, I actually don’t feel totally bad. I mean, if at any point the Bruins had pulled their heads out of their asses and stolen a game, it’s much more even down the stretch. As it is, Hoop has essentially won by default, Matt has been mathematically eliminated, and Gerard and I are playing for second prize. Still, as a lapsed Canadiens fan, I can’t complain about the outcome too terribly much, except to say that I’d rather have seen the 33^rd installment of Habs-Bruins, and third in a row, simply as an expression of sheer cosmic will that these two teams face each other all the fucking time.

Who will win the Ultimate Showdown of Ultimate Destiny out West (or as many cynics have called it, “The real Stanley Cup Final”)? Who will win the skirt-tearing slap fight of Cinderella teams out East? Answers to these questions, and many more, after the jump.

Your Stanley Cup finalists are Philadelphia and Chicago. Series starts Saturday. Go Hawks.

Wales Conference Final

(7) Philadelphia vs. (8) Montreal

Playoff History: This will be the sixth meeting all-time between the Flyers and the Habs, and the fourth to decide who plays for the Cup. Most recently, the Flyers knocked off the top-ranked Habs in just five second-round games, based in no small part on the poor showing of Carey Price.

1973 SF	1976 SCF	1987 CF	1989 CF	2008 CSF
4-1	4-0	4-2	4-2	4-1

Last Time They Were Here: For Philly, just a couple of years ago after they beat the Habs, only to get ousted by Pittsburgh in five. For Montreal, it was 1993, when they creamed the Cinderella Islanders in five games.

Season Series: Tied 2-2, all in regulation with Montreal winning the first and last meetings.

Doogie Says: Part of me kind of wants to puss out and take a pass on this one, because really, how do you pick between two Cinderella teams? I mean, really, what’s your poison? The team riding an absurdly hot goalie and winger, which has played all 14 games, and has a defence full of walking wounded, and has offed the President’s Trophy winners and the defending Stanley Cup champions? Or the team with half their top six on the DL or playing through serious injury, which just completed the greatest comeback in professional sport, as only three other teams in the history of North American pro sport have ever accomplished, and did so for the most part with their third-string goalie? How the hell do you make that kind of choice?

Well, since looking at stats is probably useless at this point, you go back through history, look for patterns, and make an educated guess. I stated in the comments to the last predictions post that I think the 2010 Canadiens look superficially an awful lot like the 2003 Anaheim Mighty Ducks, at least in terms of accomplishment and method thereof, so figure on Hal Gill to ride Simon Gagne back onto the IR and little Danny Briere right into the ice, Halak to continue to make Big Saves, and Cammalleri to continue his assault on the record books. Habs in six.

Hoop Says: Both teams are incredible stories this year in the post season. Philly was the first team in 35 years to come back from 3-0 down. While Montreal has taken out the President’s Trophy winners and the defending Stanley Cup Champions. When I look at this matchup it boils down to one major difference to me and that is goaltending. Michael Leighton did not look sharp in game 7 and was fortunate that his team came back. In fairness it takes time to get your feel back after a long injury. However that is time Leighton will not have, while Jaroslav Halak has been the MVP of the playoffs I don’t see that changing. Montreal in 6.

Matt Says: Had this been the MON-BOS series I was expecting after the Habs moved on, I would have went back to my roots as a hockey fan, but while Halak has been amazing, I think they’re going to get beat down by Philly. Besides, when as Montreal ever relied on a (pseudo-)rookie goalie to get anywhere? Flyers in six.

Gerard Says: Did you know that the winner of the last two Winter Classics lost the Cup in the Finals? That would likely have continued without the epic FAIL of Boston Friday night. But since that train got broken by the loser of this year’s Winter Classic…oh, fuck it. If Philly wins this series, that means Chicago will win the Cup. But that can’t happen, because of Hossa [ed: See below]. Montreal in 7.

Wait a sec…did I just predict the Habs to win the Cup? Madness. See Boston? This is what you reduce me to.

	6	3	1	3	4	4
	0	0	5	0	2	1

Postmortem: You know, I had a bad feeling about my Montreal pick, and I even expressed some reservations on the admin forum, but I couldn’t place it, and I figured since the Habs had done away with two teams vastly superior, on paper, to the Flyers, they should be able to overcome some stylistic differences over the course of the series. Then CBC put up a graphic during game one that flipped the switch: “No team has ever won two Game 7s and gone on to win a third series.”

Oh. Oh, fuck. Well, never mind, then.

While the series likely would’ve looked different with a healthy Andrei Markov, the bottom line is, the Habs looked tired. Their plays in both ends of the rink were sloppy, their attention to detail, their awareness, was gone, and they lost probably 80% of the puck battles and races outside of Game 3. Meanwhile, Leighton out-Halaked Halak, putting up three shutouts in a series for the first time since Marty Turco blanked the Canucks three times in 2007 (bizarrely, Turco’s Stars lost that series, anyway: they couldn’t win a single game without him posting a clean sheet). Plus, unlike most teams in playoff history, the Flyers actually got healthier. After getting Gagne back in the Boston series, they added Ian Laperriere and Jeff Carter in Game 4, and they were both solid contributors, in their respective ways, to Game 5, with two blocked shots for Laperriere and two goals for Carter. Still, I have to think they’re in tough against a Chicago team that dispatched the Red Wings and Sharks in a total of nine games. Meanwhile, congratulations to the Canadiens for reaching the semifinals for the first time since ’93, causing the experts to tear their hair out for a month and a half trying to figure you out in the process.

Campbell Conference Final

(1) San Jose vs. (2) Chicago

Playoff History: None. By the time the Sharks shook off their expansion shittiness, Chicago was on the verge of turning into hot garbage for about twelve years.

Last Time They Were Here: For the Sharks, their only prior appearance in the conference final was in 2004, when they hocked up the first two games at home against Calgary and ultimately lost in six, thus birthing a legend of playoff chokery. The Hawks, meanwhile, were here just last year, getting shown up by the Red Wings in five.

Season Series: 3-1 Chicago, with a pair of OT wins and a pretty sound clobbering at the Tank to their credit.

Doogie Says: This series is difficult to call for an entirely different reason than the Wales final is. While the Wales final consists of two teams that were kind of bad during the regular season but who got hot at the right time, the Campbell final consists of two teams who were pretty much expected to be here. San Jose has defied expectations simply by showing up here, after so many years of disappointment, while Chicago seems to be right on schedule in their development. Rest vs. Rust probably isn’t a huge factor at this point — and probably wouldn’t be beyond the first ten minutes anyway — since both teams have been off for days. That also means they’ve had time to rest up what bumps and bruises they have. In looking desperately for an advantage, I eventually turned up the following justifications: a) a slightly tougher road to the conference finals, b) the appearance of slightly better depth, and c) if you want to use the tables from here, better 5-on-5 and score-tied play throughout the year, and d) the season series. As last one should make clear, I’m going with my initial gut reaction of Hawks in six.

Hoop Says: The Sharks have been rolling even since the game 3 OT loss to Colorado in the 1st round. My concern with San Jose is who have they beaten? A Colorado team that was just happy to make the playoffs and a Detroit Red Wings team that had been worn down with a rookie goaltender that was incredibly lucky to get by an average Phoenix Coyotes squad. While Chicago got lucky in round 1 against Nashville, they really took the game to Vancouver in the 2nd round and showed their depth. The depth will likely be the deciding factor here so I am taking the Hawks. Chicago in 6.

Matt Says: I was wishing the Sharks would get buried by the Avalanche, and I honestly figured that the Wings wouldn’t have that much trouble with them, but they started swimming straight. I’m still not sure about them though, so it should be long, and definitely drawn out, but one of these times, the Sharks have to sink, right? Hawks in seven.

Gerard Says: Chicago will win in 7 games. Why? Hossa has been in the last 2 finals and has caught “Conklin Fever” (Conklin having been on the losing team in the finals 3 of the last 4 seasons while losing in the conference final the other season) having lost the cup the last 2 years.

	1	2	2	2	0
	2	4	3	4	4

Postmortem: A bit of a surprising result, not in terms of who won (note that we all had the Hawks), but in how quickly they’d do it. The series score paints a deceptive picture, though: the Sharks scored the first goal in three of the games, all of which ended in one (non-EN) goal victories for Chicago. Even when the ‘Hawks played like dog turd, as they did for the first half of Game 4, they still found a way to flip the switch when the time was right and get the goals they needed. I’m not sure if that’s more of a credit to the ‘Hawks or a deficit for the Sharks: it didn’t seem to be like they were playing badly, they just got straight-up beat by a better team. And now that better team is going on to face a team that made the playoffs on the last day, by a shootout goal, but which also staged one of the greatest comebacks in pro sport history and handily dispatched the presumed Cinderellas of 2010. They’ll have their hands full, but if this series is any indication, I don’t see any reason why the Flyers should present more than a temporary problem for these ‘Hawks. It took a while to rev ‘em up, but now that they’re going at full power, this club is a buzzsaw.

Nash, a mere 6-3, took it all in stride and so did his coach Alvin Gentry. “He’s Canadian,” Gentry said of his star point guard. “Facial lacerations don’t count in Canada.

“He says if you don’t play in a sporting event because of a facial laceration then you lose your citizenship.“

Via: CBC

To be honest, I wonder sometimes what would happen if we did care about the military.  If people actually cared about the fight like they do about sports I don’t think most countries would even want to try to fight us.

I actually have a reason for making that stupid pun. Stay with me a minute, we’ll get to it.

I don’t really have any chronological thoughts tonight, so instead I’m just going to toss up a couple of thoughts and hope that we don’t have a Game 5 next Friday:

• Drew Owsley has now been pulled in back-to-back games, while Alexander Pechurskiy gave up just one goal in 36 minutes tonight. I think it’s safe to say that the ball is now in Pechurskiy’s hands the rest of the way, barring an equal level of fail from him on Tuesday night back in…Kennewick? Shit, I’ve never heard of that place. Anyway.
• Three Hitmen went down to injury tonight, though all three — Cody Beach, Brandon Kozun, and Del Cowan — ultimately returned. Busy night for the training staff. The hit on Kozun earned Brendan Shinnimin a game misconduct, and it was a vicious one from behind into the boards in front of the bench; it looked like Kozun’s head hit the top of the boards before he went down. Somehow, that little bugger just keeps getting back up. I fear the day he doesn’t; he might actually be dead when it happens.
• On the plus side, Kozun’s second assist of the night was on a beauty of a rush: his shot forced Pechurskiy to make a big save, and while he was out of position, Tyler Fiddler deposited the puck into the empty net.
• Congratulations to Peter Kosterman, who picked a heck of a time to score his first WHL goal. It proved to be the game-winner, though I tend not to put as much stock into game winners when they come early in the second. I’m sure he doesn’t give a crap, because he scored in the WHL final.
• The Hitmen got into penalty trouble a couple of times during the game, but not only did Jones come through when he had to, but Ian Schultz continues to be an absolute penalty-killing beast in these playoffs. Shot-blocking? Lane closure? Eating the puck along the wall? Shorthanded breakaway? Got ya covered every way.
• Speaking of the PK, Kozun blocked a shot tonight on the PK. This is significant because I don’t recall him doing that terribly often, and also because he did it in the dreaded Flamingo, which I always hate, because it seldom works, and usually screens/tips more than it helps. It worked, but…yeesh.
• PP? Not so great. 0/4, including a pair of five-on-threes and the fiver to Shinnimin. Then again, teams always look bad on major PPs, in my experience, because of how long they have to possibly score. Because of where the onus is on those penalties, i.e. far more on the PK, I think it tends to elevate the PK’s play and depress the PP’s play. It’s an odd phenomenon, and it may be entirely observational, i.e. not borne out by the stats, but it definitely played out tonight. Very disorganized whenever Kozun wasn’t directing traffic.
• The Americans (I refuse to say “Ams”) finally broke Jones’s spell over them with a second-period goal, breaking his personal shutout streak of 144:34 against them this season. Johnny Lazo got the puck in close, outwaited Jones, and shelved it to make the score 3-1 early in the second, mere seconds after Owsley got the hook.

Games 3 and 4 go Tuesday and Wednesday in that city I’ve never heard of. Let’s hope they don’t come back to Calgary for Game 5 on Friday. Go Hitmen.

This is “Chelsea Dagger,” a song by the now-defunct band The Fratellis. You may know it better as “that dumb but catchy thing they play when the Blackhawks score.” With the Blackhawks set to play the Canucks tomorrow, it seems like an appropriate time to dig that out, given that I’m hoping the Canucks hear it so many times it becomes embedded in their nightmares. You know, again. Which leads me neatly into last night’s game, because holy shit, the Hitmen scored a lot of goals. The problem is, and this may also be a blessing, is that they didn’t entirely play their best game last night, and you know the Americans are going to be reeling from this spanking and out for blood. The blessing is, Mike Williamson has plenty of ammo for Video Time at today’s practice: heck, maybe he can even throw in a tape of the Kelowna series from last year, as an object lesson in the dangers of overconfidence, at least for the eight or ten guys who weren’t here for that one and don’t carry the memories of that defeat seared into every sulcus of their cerebral cortex.

Of course, there’s another good reason why the Hitmen weren’t exactly at their peak last night: this game was pretty much over by the middle of the first period. After a tentative first few minutes in which teams went through the traditional feeling-out process that often accompanies these cross-conference playoff games, Ian Schultz found a hole in the Americans’ defence and sprung Cody “Fernando” Sylvester, who scored his tenth of the playoffs, matching his regular-season total in something like a quarter of the games. A couple of minutes later, the Americans took the first of back-to-back penalties, when Eric Mestery cross-checked Brandon Kozun to the ice near the boards. Matt MacKenzie sailed home his fifth of the playoffs, and it was 2-0 Hitmen. Immediately thereafter, another Tri-City penalty, another MacKenzie goal. After the TV timeout, in which I dug out my pizza and began eating, Misha Fisenko drove around a T.C. defender and scored his first of two on the night, and I couldn’t even jump up and down because I had supper in my lap. 4-0 Hitmen eleven minutes into the game, and that was all she wrote for Drew Owsley, until now the best statistical goalie in the playoffs by a mile. The Hitmen killed a Del Cowan penalty with ease, it that was your score after one.

The second period started with another Americans penalty, in which backup Alexander Pechurskiy, the only player with an NHL game under his belt in this series, came up huge. At even strength, however, Brandon Kozun was left all alone in the slot with enough time to skate to the net, steal a drink from the goalie’s water bottle, then skate back and take the shot that gave him his eighth of the post-season. Tri-City’s defence was absolutely pathetic on this night, but Calgary’s started to slip more than a little after establishing a five-goal lead. After spending the majority of the last ten minutes of the period in their own zone, the Hitmen got a bit lucky with another huge breakdown by T.C., resulting in Fisenko’s second of the night with under a minute to go. 6-0 after two.

The third period…just kind of happened. I’ll be honest, I was scarcely following the play in the third period; I just sort of let it unfold in front of me and passively observed it without recording much. It was a pretty chippy period, as the teams started to foment distaste for one another with various behind-the-play shots and uncalled hacks and whacks. While the Hitmen got into minor penalty trouble late, they were able to get into the lanes when they had to. A bullet of a goal by Ben Wilson, a late shorthanded chance by Ian Schultz, and a fight between Cody Beach and Brock Sutherland were the only real events that got my attention at all. It’s very hard to care when you’re watching a six-goal (later seven-goal) game.

If I had to point out a player who had a truly bad game, it’d probably be Jaynen Rissling, who looked like a 16-year-old rookie defenceman in this game. He looked lost on his coverage, made a couple of bad turnovers to preserve T.C. pressure, and just generally seemed nervous and perhaps overmatched. I’ll be curious to see if Rissling trades chairs with Peter Kosterman, the other youngster who’s seen action in these playoffs due to the injury to Kyle Aschim (which I’ll be honest, I have no clue what it is). On the other hand, in addition to the pair of two-goal men, Martin Jones earned the third star for his shutout, to go along with Eastern Conference Final MVP (yeah, I forgot to mention that last time, didn’t I?) and WHL Goaltender of the Year (woo!) honours this past week. Game 2 goes tonight at 8 (late start due to the Roughnecks playoff game at 1). I expect a much better and better-prepared Tri-City team, and apparently, so do the Hitmen; let’s hope they’re as ready as they say they are.