Parity? Yes. Good hockey? No.
The prevalent idea that permeates down from the NHL offices on Sixth Avenue states having so many teams so closely bunched makes for good entertainment.
As the All-Star break has begun, let us clarify that idea: The more teams that have a chance to make the playoffs in the second half of the season, the more people will be drawn to the arenas and to their televisions … and the more money the owners and the league will make.
But there’s a disconnect: The tightly bunched standings do not mean the product is better.
As Rangers coach Alain Vigneault has continually pointed out, the Eastern Conference consists of the Capitals — then everyone else. There is only a seven-point difference between the Rangers at No. 3 and the Senators at No. 12. And did you see that barn-burner between those two behemoths up in Ottawa on Sunday afternoon? Oh, you were watching football as the Blueshirts laid “a stinker,” as Vigneault would put it a day after the 3-0 loss? Lucky you.
“If you look at all the teams, in my estimation, in my book, anyway, there’s not a lot separating teams,” Vigneault said before a 6-3 win over the Sabres on Monday night at the Garden, the umpteenth time he has said something almost identical in the past few months. “We’re all talent-wise, and team-wise, we’re all very very close to one another.”
The Sabres, there’s an example. They’re third-from-last in the conference, having a minus-22 goal differential — and have finished the third period ahead or tied in 24 of their first 50 games. In the game against the Rangers, which was supposed to be lopsided, the third period started with the Blueshirts holding a 2-1 lead. Yes, there was some back-and-forth action, but only because the Sabres’ defensemen — a loosely used term — were trying to give the puck away almost as badly as the Rangers were up in Ottawa.
But this is what commissioner Gary Bettman wanted with the hard salary cap, right? Every team has a chance to compete? Like those plucky Coyotes out in the Arizona desert, so fuzzy and cute in third place in the shell of what used to be a terrific Pacific Division.
What draws me to sports more than anything else is greatness, the intrigue around how teams and players achieve such levels of excellence. Isn’t it true that most people without a direct rooting interest will choose to watch Connor McDavid’s return to the last-place Oilers after the break rather than a big tilt between the Avalanche and Predators for wild-card positioning? A poorly played 1-1 game going into the third between Colorado and Nashville is far less interesting than a 5-1 game with McDavid.
Remember the Rangers-Canadiens game on the day before Thanksgiving — before it was so clear the league was filled with unspectacular mediocrity — when the two historic clubs met on Broadway while situated as Nos. 1 and 2 in the conference? Remember how much buzz there was around that game, and what it meant in the direct aftermath of the Habs’ 5-1 drubbing?
Well, since then the Rangers have gone 11-14-3, and somehow the Canadiens have been worse, going 8-18-2 to fall out of the postseason picture. Terrific falls from grace also are compelling, but there needs to be a reason why. The absence of franchise goalie Carey Price in Montreal is not the sole reason they’ve dive-bombed, and the reasons for the Rangers’ swoon are plentiful and complex.
But the real reason is that they’re not great teams. They lose to bad teams all the time because of … parity? Vigneault is right in saying there are no pushover dates on the schedule anymore. There are almost no nightly matchups in which the outcome is a given. It has made every night a grind, and in turn, diluted the best of what hockey can offer — which is watching great teams.
Let’s just hope it’s a Capitals-Blackhawks final, and we get there quickly.
The real villains in the John Scott case
Here’s the thing that gets me about the fiasco that is John Scott and the All-Star Game — the same people who led the immature Internet campaign to get Scott elected are now most vocal about how he was treated unfairly by the NHL. Remember, if you voted for Scott, you put him in this difficult situation. (Also, if you’re a “member of the media,” no one should have to tell you to refrain from “fan” activities.)
The NHL was foolish to make everyone in the league a possible vote-getter, and still, once they saw Scott was receiving all this support, they should have nipped it in the bud. As Scott revealed in , an unnamed NHL official was also awful in calling Scott and apparently saying, “Do you think this is something your kids would be proud of?” Ugh.
But the NHL and the Coyotes were not wrong in initially asking him not to go. And Scott is not wrong in telling them to shove it, especially after the conspiracy-laden trade that shipped him from Arizona to Montreal and then to the minors, all the way in Newfoundland.
But if you’re one of the people who put Scott in this situation, please express your hypocritical indignation elsewhere.
Is it just me …
… or did Dennis Wideman pull up? It seems like I’m in the minority here, so maybe I’m wrong. But it sure looked to me like the Flames defenseman stopped a bit before slamming into referee Don Henderson on Wednesday night.
Now, of course, there can’t be any intentional contact with an official, and it does look as if Wideman could have bear-hugged him instead of leveling a cross-check to the back. That should warrant a suspension, the length of which is coming after a hearing on Feb. 2.
But I agree with former ref Kerry Fraser, — not necessarily the minimum of 25 that’s in the rule book for attacking a ref.
Bumbling Bostonian
Tapes of Jack Edwards, the Bruins’ play-by-play man on NESN, could be used as teaching points for how NOT to call a game. Just when you think he can’t top himself, he does this:
Honestly, I understand if Bruins fans like him, and that’s fine. He’s quirky and an unabashed homer, and if that’s what the people want, I’m OK with it. It’s just not how the job should be done. Need more examples?
Stay tuned …
… to the Penguins. ? Not me.
Oh, wait — maybe this isn’t a coach’s mastery, but rather a very talented team that heeded a wake-up call? Even if their second half is as good as their 5-1-2 stretch leading into the break, it’s still hard to think the hard-nosed Sullivan is the answer behind Sidney Crosby’s bench.
Parting shot
Need some warmth in your heart in the aftermath of that blizzard? How about the reaction of this young Canadiens fan who gets a puck during warmups.