Kolzig's Rough Night: Caps fall 5-3

Capitals 3, Sabres 5

Going into this season a lot of things would have to had to have gone right for the Capitals to earn one of the Eastern Conference's eight playoffs spots; one of them was that Olaf Kolzig needed to steal some games for the team. So far this hasn't happened this season and last night against Buffalo Kolzig cost his team the game. Of the five goals the Sabres scored last night one was an empty netter and three were ones Kolzig should have had.

The Sabres first goal was the most frustrating because it was not only a physical mistake but a mental one. Physical mistakes like flubbed passes, missed rebounds or stumbling on the ice will happen to anyone sooner or later, and can only be helped so much. But there are no excuses for mental errors. Especially when you're a 37-year-old veteran who's supposed to be a leader on a young team, and Kolzig's mistake was a big one. Coming out to play the puck was not the problem; in fact it was probably the right decision. But the way he chose to play it was downright stupid. As a netminder, if you're going to play the puck you need to slide your blocker hand up to the top of the stick and play it like any other skater (for example), you cannot slap at it with the backhand like Kolzig did. I learned this within the first few months of playing goalie as a nine-year-old, just from common sense (rather than a coach) so I'm sure Kolzig knows better, and of course the end result of his bad decision was as bad as it gets. Kolzig was out of the net and put the puck right on Roy's stick. The only way he could have made things easier would have been if he'd picked the puck up and dropped it into his own net.

The second goal wasn't entirely Kozlig's fault (it rarely is when you have a guy like Maxim Afinogenov bearing down on you), but he should have had that particular puck. Yes, Mike Green tipped the puck and it probably threw Olie off a bit, but it didn't take a weird bounce or anything like that - it slid by Olie's leg on the ice and Kolzig needs to have the bottom portion of the net taken away so that a puck like that doesn't get in.

The Sabres' third goal (from Drew Stafford) was another than was Kolzig's fault. Behind the net is not generally a high-scoring area and it's not a priority for defensive players compared to the slot, the corner or the point because scoring opportunities don't come from behind the net very often unless the player is allowed to move through the area very quickly (or is Wayne Gretzky). Stafford was not moving particularly fast, didn't wheel his way into the slot and didn't get off a particularly good shot. Simply put, there's no reason that puck should have wound up in the Capitals net.

This isn't the first game Kolzig's had like this in the 2007-08 season. While he's been good on some nights and made some great saves, far too many shots have slipped under Kolzig's legs or through the five-hole. Save percentage is not a perfect indicator of a goaltender's ability and with the relatively inexperienced defense Kolzig probably faces tougher shots than the average netminder. That said, after last night's game Kolzig's save percentage is .896. Among qualified leaders the median is .907, and Kolzig ranks 34th out of 43 goalies who qualify. This is simply not getting the job done.

Even during his prime, Kolzig was not as good as he was often given credit for. I've always felt that, even at his best, many of Kolzig's goaltending attributes were average or slightly above average - his lateral movement, reflexes and ability to make the most difficult saves. None of this is surprising for a positional goalie, and as far as positional goalies go Kolzig was one of the best: huge, good on his angles, technically sound and great positionally. Given this, Kolzig was perfect for the Capitals in the 90's, when the Caps were a sound defensive team. With the rest of the team allowing very few shots Kolzig could play the angles, control rebounds and be very successful. Recently Kolzig has become vulnerable with a young team in front of him, especially in the post-lockout NHL because of his style of play.

What is comes down to at this point is: right now, Kolzig is a mediocre NHL goalie. I've been holding off on saying that, but the fact it is it's true. Since the lockout Kozlig's has a .902 save percentage and only two shutouts; this season he's had as many games (8) with a save percentage of .880 or worse as he's had with a save percentage of .910 or better. Since his last solid game on November 28th against Florida, Kolzig has stopped only 85.8% of shots against him.

Recently the Ducks put Ilya Bryzgalov on waivers, causing a debate to crop up amongst Capitals fans about whether the team should place a claim on him to replace Brent Johnson as the backup (I thought yes; others disagreed). Bryzgalov went on to be claimed by the Phoenix Coyotes, where he posted a .921 save percentage. Hindsight is of course 20/20, but perhaps the Capitals would have been well served to pluck Bryzgalov from the waiver wire to be their starter (or at least for a platoon role).

I appreciate all that Kolzig's done for the franchise over the years both on and off the ice and he will deservingly go down as one of the best to ever wear a Capitals uniform and will see his his number raised to the rafters. But this Capitals team isn't good enough to make the kind of run it needs to with a sub-par starting goaltender. If the Caps want to challenge for a playoff spot Kolzig is going to need to significantly step up his play.

Aside of Kolzig the team played decent, but not great. On the plus side the Caps put good pressure on the Sabres for the most part and moved the puck well in the offensive zone, especially on the powerplay. On the negative side the team struggled to get the puck out of their zone too often, let a man open in front to score the Sabres fourth goal and were called for six minor penalties, including one for too many men.

As frustrated as I was with Friday's loss, the Capitals had a very successful homestand, winning three of four from difficult opponents, getting their offense going, showing they can win close games and, perhaps most importantly, playing with confidence. It would be hard to overestimate the effect of the newfound confidence for the players - earlier in the season they would have folded in each of the last four games and picked up two points if they were lucky.

With that in mind, the Capitals play Saturday against Tampa Bay, a team they should beat. If they can do so they could be a little as six points out of a playoff spot and seven points out of the division lead. As we've seen, it could be much worse.

Quotable

""You can't gift wrap two goals. The first goal -- I never go out and play the puck with one hand. It was just a rookie mistake and was inexcusable with a minute left, especially with a one-goal lead and playing pretty good."

-Kolzig on his play that led to the Sabres first goal.

Random Thoughts: Team Names, Facebook and the Blogosphere

I've discovered a hockey-related pet peeve: when people use stupid derogatory names for opposing teams. Specifically I am referring to people called the Capitals the 'craps' or 'crapitals'.

Now, I don't have an inherent aversion to teasing teams or their fans by calling them something other than their actual name. I have no problem with people using the terms Rags (Rangers), Kitties (Panthers) or Fishsticks (Islanders). But 'crapitals' offends me. Not because I am a Capitals fan but because it brutalizes the English language because it is is such a bad pun. It's not clever in any sense, it's not a very inventive play on words and frankly, it's childishly crude. Again this isn't because I'm a Capitals fan - I get almost as irritated when people refers to Atlanta as the 'Trashers' (it's just as bad a pun but it doesn't have the fourth-grade level 'slight crudeness=funny' aspect to it so it doesn't bug me as much).

What got me thinking aout this was actually Facebook (yes, I am young enough that Facebook was a must-have for the end of my undergraduate career). After friending Ted Leonsis (seriously) and seeing he had the Washington Capitals Fan application, I added it. This little thing lets you discuss the Capitals, post articles, etc. One of the features is "Smack Talk", that matches fans of each team against one another on a common page in the days leading up to a head-to-head match-up and basically lets them rip into each other. A more depressing thing I have not seen on the internet in a long while.

What you might have hoped for would be (relatively) good-natured ribbing: teasing about Mike Green's haircut, arena quality, jerseys, and so on. Rather it quickly turned into people making baseless assertions (one person referred to the "skill and teamwork" of a group of players that included Ryan Hollweg and Jagr; another said Kolzig was one of the best goalies in the NHL) and personally attacking other people and the cities they lived in (often with rampant profanity) and the constant use of the term "gay" as an insult (another pet peeve of mine). I was actually considering going back and looking up some comments and posting them here but honestly I was afraid it would just depress me.

But once I started to look on the bright side it made me realize how lucky the NHL, and the Capitals, are to have such an active and intelligent blogosphere. Sure, there are still blowhards and jerks out there, but they're less likely to muck things up and they're less likely to survive, since a blog that's just profane complaining and insults isn't going to get read and isn't going to last very long. People who have nothing to contribute but clichés, insults and wishes of bodily harm to players they would love if they wore the right sweater but instead hate and who take the game more seriously than the players who play in it are either forced to adapted or are weeded out. Intelligent discourse reigns in the blogosphere.

We Capitals fans are lucky to have so many intelligent, devoted and insightful fans who are willing to share their thoughts with the rest of us and make being a Capitals fan a little bit more interesting and fun every day. Thank you, CapsChick, Peerless, JP, Shmee, Mark, those at On Frozen Blog and all the other Capitals bloggers out there who are helping make the internet what it can be: a forum for intelligent and passionate discussion, rather than a place for people to take out their frustrations about life in general at others from behind the anonymity and protection of a keyboard.

I Just Don't Have It In Me...

Capitals 5, Rangers 4 (OT)

For those who went to college: remember back to college, how bad finals were? Well, they're exponentially worse in graduate school and I just don't have the energy for a full recap.

What a fun game to watch though (especially for how it ended if you're a Caps fan). It's great to see the Capitals step up in certain areas to make up for where they're shaky; on a night when the defense was shaky and Kolzig was average the offense put in five against one of the best defensive teams in the NHL.

I'd like to briefly make a couple notes about Kolzig, who had a bad first period. The first goal wasn't his fault - it was Schultz's for not getting back on Gomez, but man was it frustrating to see another one get through Kolzig's five-hole. The play the led to the second goal wasn't Kolzig's fault either - you can't expect him to stop a bang-bang play like that. But the reason the Rangers even had the puck in the Capitals end was the Kolzig decided to play it out to a Rangers player in the corner rather than freeze it, and you can fault him for that, just as you'd fault a defenseman who failed to get the puck out of the zone and let the other team gain possession without having to clear.

DMG's 3 Stars
(1) Mike Green - 1 goal (game winner), 2 assists, +3, 30:05 of ice time
(2) Joe Motzko - 2 goals, +2
(3) Donald Brashear - 2 assists and a nice fight win

Quick Hits

• The Caps may be 26th in the league in scoring but they've got to be first in goals waived off.
• First period shots: 18-7, Washington. First period faceoffs: 18-9, Washington. First period goals: 2-1, Rangers. Such is the advantage of having a goalie like Henrik Lundqvist.
• Man, the call on Bradley for holding about seven minutes into the third was weak.
• The Mike Green curl-and-drag that almost led to a Caps goal with three seconds left was simply beautiful.
  

Could the NHL be returning to ESPN?

CNNSI is reporting that the NHL may be back on ESPN before too terribly long:

According to an ESPN source, the network could be interested if it saw a fit in terms of cost and content. The network would require playoff hockey and one night of exclusivity during the regular season. "It's totally in the NHL's hands," the source said.

As one media critic expressed it, does the NHL want to be No. 7 on ESPN or No. 1 on Versus? The league does indeed receive more loving care from Versus than it did on ESPN, despite the half-hour show ESPN2 used to give it nightly, but its absence from the cable heavyweight has taken hockey one step further from the national conversation. ESPN's tentacles reach so many places, and a hug by the network might help restore some luster.

This is a move the league desperately needs. For all the hardcore hockey fans out there (and there are a lot, probably more than some of the other major sports) the league has had trouble reaching casual fans - the kind who flick on ESPN and watch whatever is on; whatever ESPN is covering. By getting out there the NHL is going to gain more fans. Look at the NFL - it's near impossible to not know the biggest stories in the NFL and to it's very easy to be a fan because it's covered so much. The NFL is at the forefront of sports news because it's the biggest league in the United States but it's also the biggest league in the United States partially because it's at the forefront of sports news every night.

Caps Over Devils 3-2 at Verizon Center

Capitals 3, Devils 2

Before I get into the game recap, I'd like to look at what was the most exciting part of the night (other than the final buzzer) for me: Quintin Laing's first NHL goal.

For those who may not know, Laing is 28 years old and prior to joining the Caps this year had played three NHL games, all in the 2003-04 season with Chicago. Laing has been playing professionally since 2000 in places like Jackson, Mississippi, Norfolk and Hershey. He's blocked nine shots in his first four games with the Caps, twice blocking four. He grinds, he works, he hits, he gives up the body and now, at age 28 and after more than six full seasons in the pros, he is an NHL goal scorer. The fact that his goal was the game winner makes it even sweeter.

Just three days after being beaten by a goal in Newark, and called out by their coach, the Capitals returned the favor on home ice behind goals by Nicklas Backstrom, Jeff Schultz and Laing.

The Capitals were solid in the first, dominant in the second and came out looking like crap in the third. While there are no excuses for coming out as disorganized as the Capitals did in that period, it looks worse than it was because of the fact that Olaf Kolzig let in a goal he simply shouldn't have. It was a decent play by David Clarkson to win the puck behind the net, pull down the Capitals defenseman (either Schultz or Shaone Morrisonn) without being noticed by the officials and put the puck on net, but Kolzig has to have that puck. Period.

I think it's worth noting what helped the Caps get back on track: a great shift by Bradley, Laing and David Steckel. That's exactly what you want your third/fourth/checking line to do - go out and create momentum for your team and keep the puck away from the opposition when they seem like they've got things going.

Next up: Rangers, in D.C., on Friday.

DMG's 3 Stars
(1) Quintin Laing - 1 goal (the game winner), +1
(2) Nicklas Backstrom - 1 goal, +1
(3) John Erskine - 2 assists

Quick Hits

• Man, does Nicklas Backstrom ever have some poise with the puck in front of the net.
• Milan Jurcina had six hits; Schultz had three for the second game in a row (Ovechkin had five; Brash had three)
  
• Whether or not the play at the end of the first should have been reviewed to see whether the Caps should have had a goal is debatable, and that debate took away from something important on the play: Tomas Fleischmann going hard to the front of the net and digging around. Look like Fleischmann may be realizing that, despite his successes in the AHL, he isn't skilled enough to get by on skill alone at the NHL level.
• Is it wrong that as soon as Craig Laughlin said "to me, that's not a kick", suggesting the Devils goal would stand I thought 'Oh, good, this is getting waived off'? Seriously, Laughlin has be awful this year at predicting when goals would be called off/allowed to stand. But then this is also the same guy who tonight said "getting that shot [from the point] through is a skill and the Caps' young defensemen have been able to do it all season long".
• Tough guy, that David Clarkson. Wouldn't go with Brashear off the draw early in their shifts about five minutes into the third but had no problem shoving Brash in the back after the whistle at the end of the shift.
• Brian Pothier was scratched again - no surprise with how this lineup played against Atlanta a few days ago.
• With his goal tonight Jeff Schultz leads the team with a 27.2 shooting percentage. Just sayin'...
  

I Love You, Coach Boudreau: Part II (Caps over Thrashers, 6-3)

...or: Why Mike Green Should be an All-Star

Capitals 6, Thrashers 3

"Wow, the Capitals working very hard here in the first period. They must have gotten a very strong message last night, even beyond Pothier sitting out."

So said one of the Thrashers television commentators a little more than halfway through the first period, with the Capitals up 2-0 and buzzing around the Thrashers' zone.

The first period in tonight's game was the complete antithesis of the first period against New Jersey is almost every way - the Caps came out with a snarl, looked energized and aggressive, and finished the period with a two goal advantage. The most notable improvement was the forechecking, as the Capitals put pressure on the Thrashers' players every time the puck was in their zone. Not only does aggressive forechecking yield the commonly talked-about advantages of wearing out the other team, keeping the puck out of your own zone and generating more scoring chances, it helps you to draw penalties as the opposition gets tired and frustrated, something that's especially true in the post-lockout NHL. That Capitals saw that first hand tonight, drawing five penalties in the game's first twenty-five minutes (one was waived off due to Schultz's goal).

Why, why, why does it feel so good to beat the Thrashers? Their ugly uniforms? Their whiny, poutey, superstar who can't control his temper (and who once grabbed Chris Clark by the facial protection Clark was wearing after breaking his palate bone and pulled)? Retribution against Don Waddell for ruining the U.S. Olympic team? Because I live in Atlanta? Whatever the reason, this was a very satisfying win.

One question I'm toying with is this: was the game closer than the score or not as close? On the one hand the Capitals controlled the play most of the game and the Thrashers' last two goals came late enough that they weren't really a threat. On the other hand the Capitals only outshot the Thrashers by one (27-26) and had at least one lucky goal (Ovechkin's), one caused by the Thrashers' player running over his own goalie (Pettinger's) and one that where Kari Lehtonen just should have made the stop (Green's second).

I'm inclined to say that the game really wasn't quite as close as the score. Yes, Ovechkin and Pettinger scored goals that were at least somewhat lucky but they were also good plays by the Capitals. Plus, on the Thrashers' last two goals Olaf Kolzig didn't look too great - they weren't scored as the result of the Capitals being clearly outplayed

That note brings me to another question mark: Kolzig's inconsistent play in this game (one goal on eighteen shots through periods one and two; two goals on eight shots in the third). Early on Kolzig looked like a man on a mission, not surprising as his career success, veteran status and competitive nature probably meant he was upset about being called out by Boudreau, and hence indeed was a man on a mission. Still, those third period goals were pretty weak. Here's hoping they were just the result of a 37-year-old playing on back-to-back nights getting tired in a game that was already decided.

All things considered, a stellar effort for the Caps and much of the credit must go to Coach Boudreau. This team could easily have shrugged off last night's loss against the Devils as a decent game and the result of bad luck and come out flat again against Atlanta. Instead the team came out flying, playing like they were hell-bent on winning and, just as importantly, like they expected to win. Quite a change from the Hanlon days when the team looked like they were merely hoping to win.

SportsSouth aired a brief pre-game interview with Boudreau in between the first and second period. As part of it Boudreau said (this is a little paraphrasing):

We won't accept mediocrity and we shouldn't accept mediocrity. There might be guys who want to look at it as 'oh, well we lost by one goal to New Jersey and we outshot them in the last two periods' and think that's enough. That's not enough.

and then went on to talk about how what mattered was winning, essentially giving a roundabout explanation as to why there are no moral victories at this point for the Capitals.

Boudreau's approach is quite refreshing after Hanlon's. With Hanlon the impression was that if the Capitals came out and outshot the other team and were the better team for the last two periods it would be considered a successful night. There was nothing wrong with that approach initially; in fact it was the right one while the Capitals were more concerned with developing their young players than their win-loss record. The problem was that attitude had carried over into this season, where the emphasis is on the win-loss record. With Boudreau behind the bench it's not going to be okay to play fifty-five good minutes out of sixty, and wins and losses are measured by the final score alone. Boudreau has said several times that it's his job to prepare the team to the point where they think they will win every night. I can't speak for the team, but his attitude has me believing they can pick up two points any and every time out...and unwilling to accept less.

DMG's 3 Stars
(1) Mike Green - 2 goals, +3
(2) Nicklas Backstrom - 1 goal, 2 assists, +3
(3) Alexander Ovechkin - 1 goal, 1 assist, +3, 5 shots

Quick Hits

• The Caps first penalty of the game, to Erskine was painful for two reasons. First of all, what's happening in this league when you can't even hit a guy as the puck is getting to him? Secondly, if the refs had called intereference like that in Jersey on Friday the Caps would have spent 40% of the game on the powerplay.
• The wave at a Caps game? I can't remember the last time I saw that!
• Garnet Exelby should have been called for kneeing Kozlov in the second period. It wasn't intentional, but it was still a knee and needed to be called.
• Speaking of Excelby, he's a tough one on the blue line. Imagine if Atlanta had him and Dion Phaneuf patrolling back there. Could have happened if Don Waddell hadn't decided to pick Braydon Coburn with the eight overall pick, leaving Phaneuf for the Flames at #9.
• Speaking again of Excelby, how did he make it through the game without being beat down by Brashear?
  
• Man, from the goals he has scored it seems weird to me that Nicklas Backstrom was only shooting 5% coming into Saturday's game.
• Three Capitals had three hits: Brashear, Erskine, Ovechkin and Jeff Shultz (!) (bet you didn't see that one coming).
  
• The Thrashers' announcers were pretty adamant Holik didn't hit Matt Pettinger from behind, or even from the side, in the second. Didn't look that way to me.
• Fantastic decision to pinch by Green on the play that led to his first goal.
  
• Does anyone get more excited when their teammates score than Alex Ovechkin?
• Marian Hossa had a very quiet night - I didn't hear his name until 10:45 had gone in the third.
• Milan Jurcina had one play in the second where he cleared the net by putting a guy right on his butt and a big hit on Chris Thorburn (who drew a retaliatory penalty) in the third. Quite different from when Jurcina tried to explain a holding penalty by saying the Capitals wanted him to play physical. I guess he's getting things figured out.
• I really wish John Erskine were a decent skater because it's great to have his attitude in front of the net.
  
• Against New Jersey he was zipping around the ice, drew penalties and scored a nice goal. Against Atlanta he drew at least one more penalty, picked up an assist and broke Kari Lehtonen's mask with a wrist shot. Alexander Semin looks like he's finally back.
• And now for the unsung hero section - Quintin Laing. Late in the second the was not only tough around the net, he tried to goad Ilya Kovalchuk into a fight. Laing is the prototypical NHl fourth-liner: hustles every second he's on the ice, fights for puck, blocks shots. At this point I'd like to see him in the lineup over Bradley if the Caps ever get healthy enough that they have to make that decision.
  

I Love You, Coach Boudreau

...or: Why the Caps Might Turn Things Around. Okay, maybe that's not best title, but I really like those 'or' titles, you know? Like Dr. Strangelove or: How I Learned to Stop Worrying and Love The Bomb.

Anyhow, per Tarik at Capitals Insider Brian Pothier will be watching tonight's game from the press box. Boudreau is no joke - he clearly expects the team to win and man, is it refreshing. I still think Hanlon did a great job when he was here but his "Aw, shucks, it's okay, we all make mistakes, let's just go out and try to do better next time" attitude, which was perfect for a rebuilding team, wouldn't suffice for situations like this. Boudreau has clearly brought a little instant respectability with the way he holds players accountable, demands they play their best and expects to win.

Hanlon's buddy-buddy attitude and constant encouragement were great for a team full of players trying to find their way in the NHL who needed to go out and play relaxed every night. Now, the team is not so young and most of the players have enough NHL experience that they ought to be able to step up and have more expected of them without "gripping the stick too tight" as the expression goes.

The Funniest Hockey Video I've Ever Seen

Let me say first of all that Dion Phaneuf is one of my favorite players (along with Iginla, Ovechkin, Halpern and a few others), and the second biggest reason I think Don Waddell ought to be fired is that he drafted Braydon Coburn ahead of Phaneuf (the biggest being the United States Olympic debacle in Turino). But this video is just so funny I feel I have to share it with everyone.

Oh, and it's even better with the sound on.

Caps Lose in Newark (no word on whether any were mugged coming out of the arena)

Capitals 2, Devils 3

The Devils just had to pick the game against the Caps to have Scott Stevens night, didn't they? And they just had to have the first image of Stevens in the tribute video be him on the Capitals bench didn't they?

I don't know how much of it was aired on the Caps broadcast, but I was getting Devils feed from Center Ice and I would have to say it was a nice little ceremony. The only part that was a little weird was when they showed Stevens' famous (infamous?) hit on Lindros. It might be his most notable check and it sure is a hell of hit but it's just unsettling to me to see the moment that one of the most exciting players to come into the league in the last twenty years had his career effectively ended (or at least diminished). Classy on Stevens' part to thank both the Capitals and the Blues in his Hall of Fame introductory speech (which was shown as part of the ceremony), but the most interesting part was when Stevens thanked Lou Lamoriello for making New Jersey his home. Think that's the first time that's ever happened?

I also think this is worth mentioning: the Devils commentary team was as woefully prepared as I've ever heard any broadcast team be in any sport. And I've seen this. And this. And I watch the World Cup on the broadcasts with American announcers. But these guys were a whole new level - they referred to Backstrom and Zubrus as teammates from last year, stumbled over their own notes and at one point confused Mike Green with Jeff Schultz. How do you even do that? I mean, yeah, they're both Capitals defensemen but Green is right handed and is about 6'1'' and 190 pounds (I know what he's listed at, but there's no way he's over 200) and Schultz is left handed and 6'6'' and 225.

As for the game:

What an atrocious first period, full of stupid plays on the Capitals part. Stupid, unnecessary penalties on Schultz for tripping and Laich for tackling holding. The crowning moment (of stupidity) was Pothier's pass right up the middle of his own zone that lead to Vishnevski's goal and put the Caps behind 1-0. Anyone, anyone, down to grade-school kids, who's been playing or following hockey for more than a month can tell you that you never make that play unless there are acres of free space in front of you. Especially bad when your team is trying to play a tight defensive game against a defensively sound opponent who has won eight straight.

The stupidity continued right up the very end, with Green's hooking penalty with a minute left in the third. There's not way to blame that call on the refs either. It was a clear hook and just....well, stupid on Green's part.

The frustrating thing for fans (and for the team as well, I'm sure) is that other than their momentary lapses (Pothier's pass, Green's penalties) and bad breaks (Ovechkin having his shot off the post go out; Travis Zajac's goal) the Capitals played well, and if the Devils don't have Martin Brodeur in net, I'm not sure so they win that game. Considering the Capitals were missing their captain (Clark), their number one center (Nylander) and their best defensive forward (Gordon), they played very well for most of the game.

Regular readers know you're not going to make it through very many of my write-ups (for this season at least) without a mention of the bad luck the Capitals have faced and here it is: The Devils third goal, scored by Zajac is the latest example of horrible luck for the Caps: guys getting tied up; mixed up down low and the puck comes both right in front of the wide-open net and right onto the offensive player's stick. That's only happened against the Capitals this year; it doesn't happen for them.

The unfortunate reality, I think, is that this just isn't that Capitals year. They can't get bounces, can't get calls, can't even get the ice to freeze at Verizon Center and have been dealing with injuries to key players since training camp. The bad news is that it may be time to accept the team's fate of another year out of the playoffs, another lottery pick and another season of crowds of 13,000 at the Verizon Center for Caps games.

The good news is that I don't think all that much has changed from the start of the season to now really. Were it not for injuries, bad luck and timely mistakes the Capitals could easily be in the playoff race. Alexander Ovechkin is still one of the best players in the game, Alexander Semin is still capable of scoring forty goals in a season, Clark and Matt Pettinger are still solid two way players, Gordon and Dave Steckel are still good shutdown forwards, Mike Green is going to be an all-star caliber player before too long, Tom Poti can log a lot of important minutes, if someone else can step up to play with Shaone Morrisonn the Capitals will have a very good shutdown defensive pairing and Boudreau seems to be doing an excellent job coaching the team thus far. Add that to the fact Karl Alzner, Chris Bourque and (very likely) a very high draft pick (Steve Stamkos?) will be ready to compete for roster spots and Jaromir Jagr will be off the books for the Caps and things still look pretty bright for next season.

Maybe it seems silly to be talking about next season three weeks before Christmas and maybe in some ways it's premature. After all, I'm not quite ready to call it quits on the 07-08 campaign yet (but I am very close). The point I was making is just that, although the Capitals have been very disappointing this year, most of the cause of the preseason excitement is still going to be around next year. This organization still has a wealth of young, talented players and that's not going to change. The Capitals will be a force in the Eastern Conference before too long.

As for the present: the Capitals are now 9-17-2, a full ten points out of a playoff spot and in need of a serious run, a Devils-esque (nine in a row) run in fact. If they're going to there's no better time to start than Saturday night: playing at home coming off a tough loss and facing the Thrasher who . . . you know, suck.

Quick Hits

• Eleven minutes into the first period shots were 4-1, Capitals. Five shots. In eleven minutes. For both teams combined. That's Devils hockey for ya, folks.
  
• The Caps were dominated in the physical game. Period.
• That said, the Devils were lucky the refs were fairly lenient. There were about a half dozen potential interference minors, none of which were called.
• Thank you, Alexander Semin, for reminding us just how good you can be.
  
• I was surprised to see Langenbrunner back on the ice after he went hard into the boards - from how he was favoring his right arm I was sure it was broken.
  
• Joe Motzko had a really nice play in the first where he cleared what would have been a sure goal out of the crease and into the corner. Great awareness.
• Credit where credit's due: David Clarkson did a great job frustrating Ovechkin in the offensive zone.
  
• At one point one of the Devils announcers said Jeff Schultz "low-bridged" David Clarkson. I'm pretty sure that for Jeff Schultz to "low-bridge" anyone they'd have to be about nine feet tall. Plus, Schultz actually stood him up.
  

CapsChick over at A View From the Cheap Seats brought this to my attention (it originally comes from Interchangeable Parts) and I thought it would be a neat little thing to address. This is what us bloggers are doing during the Capitals off days, I guess. If you're looking for something more as a reader, I have this.

1. What was your motivation for starting blogging? Has that changed at all in the time you’ve been blogging?

I'd been considering starting either a baseball or hockey website for several years but always thought I'd never have the time (or the resources - trying getting Caps games in 2003 in a dorm room in Lake Forest, Illinois or Atlanta). A friend of mine recently started a D.C. Sports Blog and asked me to write for itand seeing a chance to write a little but without the obligation to maintain a site on a daily basis I agreed. Once I started writing (primarily about the Capitals) I found that I really enjoyed it and pretty soon I did want to want to update on a daily basis, with every little bit of Capitals or NHL news I found interesting. Since Wayward Sports Sons was intended to be a D.C. sports-centric blog I decided it would be best to put all the smaller notes and stories on a different blog, so as to not clutter W.S.S. up and thus Caps Blue Line was born.

Has this changed at all? Actually it has, even though it's only been a couple months. Since I get all my thoughts on the Capitals out in this blog I find that I'm talking off the ears of my friends and family who don't really follow hockey a lot less. So everybody wins!

2. What do you think your blog contributes to the hockey conversation?

Most of all I hope it contributes intelligent discourse and gets people to think about topics in hockey they hadn't thought about before or to think about them in a different way. I try to do this by providing my rationale behind my opinions. All too often the anonymity of the internet allows people to post bold, declarative statements without having to give their rationale; this is a pet peeve of mine and has directly resulted in my (brief) defense of Brian Pothier and my (lengthy) defense of George McPhee. It's not that I think either of these guys are irreplaceable, but rather than they deserve to have their strengths and weaknesses laid out and examined in a somewhat objective manner. Hopefully by providing my own view on Capitals news and by making points in non-news related posts I can get people to think about the Capitals or the NHL a little harder, in a slightly different way.

3. What do you want to get out of the blogs you read?

There's really not any one aspect that's essential in making a blog great. It can be humor (A View From the Cheap Seats), in-depth statistical analysis (The Peerless Prognosticator) or up-to-the-minute updates from around the league (Japers' Rink).

There are two things that I think are essential in making a blog worth reading. One is that it has to be updated regularly - there are so many good bloggers out there that if you wait several days to comment on a trade, a signing, or a game you're going to get left behind. The other is that blogs need to offer opinion; they need to be more columnist than beat reporter. I've seen blogs for football, baseball and hockey that just offer brief recaps of games. To me, those aren't terribly interesting since each NHL game now has at least a half dozen traditional media outlets that write up recaps and dozens of bloggers who write lengthy, in-depth recaps. I like it when bloggers show some initiative and come up with their own post/story idea rather than just waiting for news to break.

4. What determines which blogs you read and which you don’t?

In the end hockey is a sport and blogs are entertainment; thus I like to read blogs that are interesting. As I mentioned above there are a number of ways a blog can be interesting and worth the time to read, but the one thing they all have in common is that they offer something different - different strengths, different interests, different voices.

It's also important to me that the author lay their stance out, rather than just making judgments. If someone can offer a well-reasoned argument for why trading Brian Sutherby was a bad move, I'm happy to sit and read because I want to see what the point being made is. On the flip side, if someone just writes a "WHAT ARE THEY DOING?!?!?!? SUTHERBY IS AWESOME AND A 2nd ROUND IS NOT ENOUGH! MCPHEE SUCKS!!!!" post, they're adding nothing and wasting the reader's time. Part of the reason I feel so strongly about this is that I like to read opinion I disagree with because I feel it makes me develop a more informed opinion.

The other key factor is the motivation behind the blog, which has gotten to be a bit of a problem in the Capitals blogosphere with all the attention Capitals bloggers have gotten from traditional media outlets. Wanting to talk about every aspects of Caps hockey, going back and analyzing transactions years after the fact, checking on prospects and wanting to be part of a community that dissects all things Capitals - these are good reasons to start and maintain a blog; wanting to get a press pass and watch games for free, sit in the owner's box or get your face on Hockey Night in Canada are not. If you make the rounds on the blogosphere it doesn't take long to determine which are which, as it generally shows pretty clearly. It's not a moral stance, it's just that people who write because they have something to say are generally much more interesting than people who write only because they want attention.

5. How important is the issue of gaining press access to you as a blogger?

The short answer is: not at all, since I don't live in the D.C. area.

The longer answer is that at this point it isn't important because I don't think it would make that much difference in the writing I do for this blog. Maybe in a year or two, if I am in the D.C. area,
I'll consider how active my blog is and whether having press access would benefit it.

6. To what extent do you feel accountable for the content of your blog? How concerned do you think readers should be about the authority and accountability of your blog?

I think readers ought to be concerned with the accountability of the blogs they read. A blog that isn't accountable can't be trusted to be factual or relevant, and if it isn't factual or relevant it isn't worth reading (unless of course it's obviously fake and funny as hell). That said, accountability is very important to me and if it weren't I wouldn't expect anyone to read this.

7. How concerned are you about the authority and accountability of the blogs you read? Do you find it difficult to judge the authority and accountability of the blogs you read?

My opinion is that all bloggers need to be concerned about accountability. There are no gatekeepers in blogging and new blogs pop up every day. If a blogger doesn't see accountability as important then the relevance, and readers, they may have will soon move to another blog... and I will be one of them. A blog that tries to make points or voice opinions without providing evidence isn't worth the time to read when there are so many great ones out there.

I don't think it's too hard to judge the accountability of a blog. Just like the accountability of traditional media or an academic paper, it's all in the sources. If a blogger provides their source then it can be independently verified and whatever commentary the blogger has becomes much more credible; if it's a situation where there make not be concrete analytical data say, discussing the job performance of a general manager, then examples should be provided.

8. What value, if any, do you think blogging brings to the NHL?

There's no doubt blogging bring value to the NHL, much of which comes from the fact that bloggers are independent. As a blogger, you can feel free to write whatever you want, whenever you want, an opportunity not afforded most traditional media writers who have to deal both with space restrictions, topics assigned by editors and a league that is very concerned with its public image.

The blogosphere let's people know there are other fans out there, even if markets where hockey doesn't much attention. For me personally it's been great to find out that there are other people just as nutty about the Capitals as I am; who know all the Capitals top prospects and where they play, who want to discuss possible line pairings and who understand the C.B.A. The fact that there are these people out there benefits the casual fan too. Bloggers are accessible and generally quite friendly and can answer questions casual fans might have, but might not be able to ask someone in their hometown's front office or one of the local beat writers; this is more important to hockey than any other sport.

In my experience there are so many people who are not hockey fans not because they don't like it, but because they haven't been exposed to it or who aren't very familiar with it ("wait, what's 'icing the puck' mean?") and if bloggers can provide the kind of coverage people need to learn more about the sport, gain a better understand and become more active fans, then there's no doubt the blogosphere will benefit the NHL.

Hangin' in the Southleast

...and now that that terrible pun is out of the way, let's turn our attention to the standings. Notice anything, say about the bottom of the Eastern Conference standings? The bottom four spots are occupied by Southeast division teams: Atlanta, Florida, Tampa Bay and Washington. While this is embarrassing for the Capitals, it also works in their favor.

Of the Capitals remainging fifty-five games, twelve are against Atlanta (5), Tampa Bay (4) or Florida (3). That means 22% of the Caps' remaining games are against the worst teams in the Eastern Conference. A team in such dire need of points coudn't ask for anything more.

Guess it's good for Caps fans that the NHL isn't going to their new scheduling format until next season.

Posts for the Off Days

Well Caps fans, the team finally has some time off. Five days total in fact, which means there probably won't be a ton of news coming out of the Caps camp in the coming days. Given this, I thought now would be an appropriate time to post several things I'd been working on:

Capitals
Stop the Panic! Ovechkin isn't going anywhere
Capitals Advertising Leaves a Lot to be Desired

NHL
Economics + Hockey = More Fights, Hold the Scoring Please

Capitals Videos
Caps Video Clips Post

Stop the Panic! Ovechkin Isn't Going Anywhere

As many Capitals fans know, Alexander Ovechkin's contract expires after this season, at which point he will become a restricted free agent. Hearing phrases like "contract expires" and "free agent" has created a tizzy amongst both Capitals fans and at least a couple members of the press too stupid to do any research (here and here) who are either fearful (Caps fans) or hopeful (fans of any rich team in the NHL) that Ovechkin will leave Washington. The reality of the situation is this: Ovechkin is not going anywhere this offseason.

Here's why: After the first three years a player who signed a contract between the ages of 18 and 21 will see their entry-level contract expire. At this point, if he has not signed an extension, he will become a restricted free agent provided his team has offered him a pay raise of at least ten percent if he makes less than $660,000, a five percent raise if he makes $660,001-$1,000,000 and no raise (at least the same amount as the previous season) if he makes more than $1,000,000. If the team does not offer a high enough contract, the player becomes an unrestricted free agent.

The differences between restricted free agents and unrestricted free agents is twofold. Unrestricted free agents can sign potential contracts (referred to as "offer sheets") from other teams. Once they sign an offer sheet one of two things will happen - either the team the player was originally contracted to will match the offer sheet and the player will remain under contract to his original team or the original team will let him walk and received compensation in the form of draft picks from the team that has signed the player in question away. How many picks, and what rounds they are, depends on the value of the contract. The maximum compensation is four first round draft picks. How much of this information comes form reading articles about the C.B.A. and the C.B.A. itself and how much comes from too much time spent playing Eastside Hockey Manager, I'll decline to say.

COMPENSATION CHART

$660,000 or below = No compensation due.
$660,001 to $1 million = One 3rd Round draft pick.
$1 million to $2.0 million = One 2nd Round draft pick.
$2.0 million to $3.0 million = One 1st Round and One 3rd Round draft pick.
$3.0 million to $4.0 million = One 1st Round, One 2nd Round, and One 3rd Round pick.
$4.0 million to $5.0 million = Two 1st Round, One 2nd Round, and One 3rd Round draft pick.
$5 million = Four 1st Round draft picks are.

By contrast unrestricted free agents can sign any contract they want to (their original team does not have the option to match) and the team they are being signed away from is not due any compensation.

Now, as for Ovechkin. If he makes it to the summer (still seven months away, by the way) without a new contract from the Capitals he will probably get offer sheets from other teams. But Ted Leonsis isn't stupid. He knows what it would mean for the on-ice product and what a massive P.R. blow it would be to the team to let Ovechkin walk and he isn't going to allow it to happen. The fact that the Capitals are allowed to keep Ovechkin just by matching whatever other contract offers he may receive means that he's not going to be simply signed away.

There is one scenario in which Ovechkin could leave Washington this summer, and that's if he refuses to resign with the Capitals and demands his rights be traded to another team (similar to what happened with Mike Comrie and Alexi Yashin). While such a situation is possible, I think it's unlikely. Ovechkin just doesn't seem like that kind of player and while he's frustrated by the losing there's nothing to indicate that he wants out at this point.

So what kind of contract does Ovechkin deserve? It makes sense for discussions to start with Sidney Crosby's five year, $43.5 million contract (8.7 million per year - the same as Crosby's number 87 jersey). It would also make sense for the Capitals to offer Ovechkin the same deal as Crosby, were it not for the uniqueness of the per-year dollar amount. Given this, and the fact that it would be an unwise move to offer anything Ovechkin could perceive as an insult, it would make sense tho offer Ovechkin a contract in the $8.8-9 million per year range. Reports are that Ovechkin wants more money than that though, and is looking for a contract in the $9-10 million dollar range. If Ovechkin think he's worth more per year that Crosby, he's wrong.

You can certainly make the case that the two players are of equal value on the ice: Crosby has better playmaking skills and plays a more difficult position; Ovechkin is a better pure goal scorer and athlete, and does very well in the physical game. But Ovechkin hasn't been as marketable as Crosby so far in his NHL career and thus probably does not make as much money for his franchise. The result is that, even if each player were making the same salary, Crosby's team is going to be out less money at the end of the season for having him on their roster since his immense marketability helps to defray the cost of his salary.

But that's really incidental. The important thing is that Alexander Ovechkin will indeed be wearing a Capitals uniform next season.

Caps Advertising Leaves a Lot to be Desired

As many Capitals fans already know, the team has struggled in recent years with attendance. Some of this can be chalked up to the team's performance, the horrible schedule NHL teams have had to deal with the last several years and perhaps the location of the Verizon Center. But probably more than a little of it has had to do with the Capitals' marketing campaigns, which have been lacking in recent years. This is especially true of their television ads.

There have been three television ads the Caps have run frequently this year. One features a woman in a tattoo parlor watching a Capitals game and getting the Capitals new 'W' logo tattooed on her shoulder; one features a "guy's night out" theme; one focuses on Chris Clark's leadership and toughness. Please note that when I refer to these ads I use my own terminology as I do not know for sure what the ads are officially called.

#1 - Tattoo Parlor

I couldn't find anywhere to download or embed this video, but it can be viewed by going to the Capitals website, going to the Multimedia section, clicking Caps TV and then going to Caps Insider>Commercials and In-Game Features. Here the ad is simply called 'Tattoo'.

For those of you who have not seen it and don't want to load it up, here's what happens in a nutshell. A woman is shown in a tattoo parlor watching a Capitals game. As she is being tattooed Ovechkin comes in on net and we hear Joe Beninati calling a goal for the Caps. The tattoo artist pulls back to reveal that she has finished the Caps 'W' logo on the woman's shoulder as the voiceover says "Capitals hockey. The cool alternative".

Let me be frank. I hate this ad. I do appreciate where it's coming from: "everyone in D.C. follows the Redskins religiously. Your grandparents watch baseball. The NBA is built on the image of hype and hipness to urban culture. Don't buy in. Be different. Watch hockey." But the execution of this ad is laughable.

First of all it feels like obvious pandering. A girl in a dark tattoo shop, with what I assume is supposed to be a badass look on her face, being told outright that hockey is the "cool alternative" (emphasis on the word cool)...it's all too much and way too obvious what they're trying to get at. You're going to have a hard time convincing people who want to different to be different by telling them how to be different.

But the biggest flaw in this ad is that I don't imagine it making many people who are relatively indifferent become more interested in catching a Caps game, either in person or on television and that of course is the whole goal of advertising. Rather, I think most people who don't care to much about the Capitals either ignore the ad or roll their eyes at it.

Plus, why is the woman scowling when Beninati calls the goal? Isn't she supposed to be a Caps fan?

#2 - Guy's Night Out

This ad obviously makes an effort to appeal to whole "guy's night out" concept which, again, is a good idea in theory. However the execution again needs some work. We've got shots of the guys psyched about their Caps tickets, out to dinner, having a beer, playing some pool and finally arriving at the Verizon Center where they view a Caps win. Again, maybe a decent plan but bad execution. The jerky camera, fast cut scenes and obvious references to 'chicks' and beer don't come across as fun as exciting but rather as comical (you can almost here the guys repetedly calling one another 'Dude'), and is capped by the guy who's rubbing his hands together in glee and anticipation upon sighting the Capitals tickets.

But to me, the biggest problem with this ad is how reminiscent it is of the Chappelle's Show sketch 'Dude's Night Out' featuring the imaginary Schlipps beer. It might not seem a problem at first but consider this: the target for the Capitals ad is clearly young men and many (most?) young men are familiar with Chappelle's Show, especially the more popular sketches like 'Dude's Night Out'. The association popped into my head immediately the first time I saw the Caps ad (and I'm not a huge Chappelle's Show fan or anything); now every time it airs I just laugh at the absurdity of how closely it resembles 'Dude's Night Out'. And truthfully, it makes me want to rent Chappelle's Show more than go to a Capitals game when I'm watching by myself and makes me embarrassed to be a Caps fan when I'm watching with family or friends who aren't.

Please note that the second video, 'Dude's Night Out' from Chappelle's Show may be not safe for work (NSFW) in many places.

Please also note that, to the Caps credit, this ad has been updated to feature the new uniforms and logo.






#3 - Captain Clark

The third Capitals ad I've seen aired so far this season features captain Chris Clark talking about the injuries he has suffered, his toughness and what it means to be a leader. Again, let me be frank. I love this ad and it's clearly the best of the lot from this year. The appeal is fairly simple as the ad focuses on Clark's dedication to his teammates, to the organization and to the game of hockey. Aside from being appealing to Capitals fans, most of whom would be happy to see Clark's toughness recognized, this commercial is also the most likely to interest casual fans and get them to come out and see a game.



The Capitals still have a ways to go with their marketing campaign. From what I observed while in the D.C. area, and what I'm told by others, the Capitals don't advertise much except for during telecasts of their own games which obviously hurts their odds of acquiring new fans. In addition the omission of ads featuring Kolzig (for his loyalty to the organization and achievement, including a Vezina), Semin (for his ability to make highlight reels plays) and Ovechkin (for...well, obvious reasons) is something that ought to be addressed. But at least the spot with Clark is a step in the right direction.

Hockey + Economics = More Fights, Hold the Scoring Please

Anyone who's been paying attention to the sports landscape in the United States can tell you that hockey has a tenuous hold on the title "major sport". In reality the NHL is not on the same level in terms of revenues, relevance or attention as the NFL, NBA or Major League Baseball and understandably the league has been working to change this. The three issues the league has primarily focused on when trying to increase its fan base have been: parity, scoring and fighting.

The league has worked to increase parity under the belief that fans will better support a team that has a better chance of winning every night, increase scoring because of a belief that games with more goals are more exciting to fans (and as a reaction to the incredibly low scoring games that were all too common in the early 2000's) and decrease fighting under the belief that the NHL's reputation as a league of violence was turning away casual fans.

So what actually determines interest (and hence attendance) in hockey? This was the question Rodney J. Paul attempted to answer in this paper, published in April 2003 in The American Journal of Economics and Sociology.

Winning and Parity

Not surprisingly Dr. Paul found that teams that tend to perform better on the ice in terms of standings points tend to draw bigger crowds, all else being equal. Specifically an average of one more point per game raises the attendance by 1021.809 fans per game, and by 1426.866 fans per game in the United States. Now, obviously one more point per game is an enormous difference in success. The best teams in the NHL in the 2006-07 season (Buffalo and Detroit) averaged 1.37 points per game while the worst averaged (Philadelphia) averaged 0.68, so the effect is not as large as might be expected. However, previous season's points (one additional point from the previous season means 120 more fans per game for U.S. teams, all else being equal) and playoff success (reaching the second round of the playoffs or further) were also statistically significant. Given this it seems pretty clear than more successful teams draw bigger crowds. Not shocking, I know. But since team success has significant impact on attendance and the NHL wants all of its franchises to be financially healthy it makes economic sense to increase parity, and especially to do so by the means of a salary cap.

Scoring

The league has been adamant in its insistence that fans want to see more scoring. This insistence has been the impetus behind a number of changes in recent years: not allowing goalies to play the puck in the corners, calling hooking and holding penalties when there is even intent to hook or hold, decreasing the size of goalie equipment, making a team that has iced the puck keep its players on the ice for the next faceoff and calling delay of game any time a player puts the puck out of play while in their own end. Given how loudly NHL head office officials insist fans want to see scoring Dr. Paul's finding are surprising: if all else is equal, the number of goals per game a team scores actually lowers average attendance (this coefficient was also statistically significant). On the other hand, visitors with higher per-game averages in terms of goals scored did draw bigger crowds. I would attribute this to fans desire to see marquee players, who are general offensive talents, a variable Dr. Paul did not control for. At best, the jury is out on this one, which makes you wonder why the league is so concerned with upping scoring.

Fighting

Do the fans really like fighting? That's a question that been posed in a number of different forms for years now and the overwhelming statistical evidence says 'yes'.

According to Dr. Paul's paper an increase of one fight per game will raise per-game attendance by 3859.880 fans; 4686.510 fans for U.S. teams, all else being equal. As with points per game a difference of one fight per game would be huge - the Anaheim (Fightin') Ducks led the NHL with 0.87 fights per game last year and the Detroit Red Wings had the fewest with 0.12 per game. So while in increase in fights of one per game is unlikely it's feasible that a team could see a 20% increase in their fighting majors which would result in 937 more fans per game (in the U.S.) (note: Detroit is playing to 88.8% capacity this season; Anaheim is playing to 107% capacity).

I'm not a hockey fight advocate nut and don't want to see bench clearers, the league averaging six fights a game or line brawls on a regular basis. It already irks me when people have the notion that hockey is just constant fighting and just whine about wanting to see a fight when they're at a game and I want the league to be viewed as the toughest sport in the world, not a spectacle. But I, like most hockey fans I think, do like fighting and think it has a place in the professional game. Like the league's obsession with increasing scoring it is curious, to say the least, that there has been such a crackdown on fighting when the numbers seem to clearly indicate that it draws more fans.

My theory is that one of two things is going on. One possibility is that the NHL has different data or is getting different results from what is presented in Dr. Paul's paper. However, I would be pretty surprised if that were the case as it's unlikely people's preferences would have changed so drastically in only a few years. What I think is more likely is that the NHL is chasing people who are either casual fans or are not fans of the NHL and in doing so they're following an opinion that is parroted by so many talking heads with little or no knowledge of the NHL or the game of hockey. It seems like the league is chasing these people and trying to make them into fans which really just isn't going to happen. This is in large part, I believe, due to the fact the Gary Bettman does not come from a hockey background and thus is predisposed to give these voices more pull than they should have. Sadly I do not have any analytical data for this but my experience has been that when people start talking about what a travesty it is that the NHL has lesser penalties for fighting than other sports, they're people who wouldn't watch the NHL anyway (seriously, the next time it happens, ask).

The reality is that fighting, along with exciting games with plenty of scoring chances, draws crowds as long as the fighting doesn't get out of control. That's why hockey was booming in the early to mid 90s - the 80s (and early 90s, to me, but maybe that's because I can't remember much before then) were great hockey and so people started to sit up and take notice. Now the league is chasing whatever additional attention and revenue it can get in the next six months without thinking about what it can do to make itself the best professional sports league in the world in the long run.

That's really what it comes down to. The league needs to stop its obsession with month-to-month attendance and dreaming up new gimmicks to try and put a few more people in the seats for a short period of time and instead focus on making the league the most exciting league in the world and marketing it as so. If they're able to do that concerns over the NHLs popularity and viability should cease.

Caps Video Clips

Remember how good Alex Semin can be?






Remember when Stephen Peat and P.J. Stock fought one Saturday afternoon in Boston? To this day, I think it's the best fight I've ever seen.



Remember that time the Capitals got into the big ol' brawl with the Bruins and Olaf Kolzig fought former teammate and best man at his wedding, Byron Dafoe?

Well, here's part 1:



And part 2:






and you didn't think I'd forget this one, did you?



and of course Ovechkin's game isn't all skill:






Ovechkin videos come from www.ovechkinfans.com

Capitals/Panthers Recap: Caps Win 2-1

Capitals 2, Panthers 1

After the Capitals 4-3 loss to Carolina I wrote that the bad luck that had been plaguing the team for more than twenty games only seemed to be getting worse and wondered when it would finally end.

As the expression goes: "It's always darkest before the dawn".

Luck finally seemed to be on the Capitals side last night, and as a result the team caught a number of breaks during the game:

• Pothier's goal was the result of a good decision to put the puck on net, but Vokoun really should stop that shot.
• The Capitals also caught a break on Ovechkin's goal. As talented as Ovechkin is, 95% of the time you score that kind of angle it's more luck than skill.
• The call on Bryan Allen for holding Ovechkin was weak. Not only did he not hold him, I even thought whether there was intent to hold was questionable.
• Olli Jokinen had his stick slashed by a Capitals player hard enough to break it, but the Capitals were not called for a penalty.
• With about three minutes left in regulation Dave Steckel caught Rostislav Olesz with a high stick that was missed by the referees.

I don't mean to imply the Capitals managed to pick up a win when they didn't deserve to. The Caps outshot Florida 43-25 and controlled the play for the majority of the game, while Brent Johnson had a very good night between the pipes, stopping 24 of the Panthers 25 shots. It was nice to finally see the bounces and calls going the Caps way though.

The Capitals now have five days off, days they need to rest after their stretch of playing ten times in sixteen days. The team will also have the chance to fully absorb Bruce Boudreau's system. Obviously the changes he has been able to make so far have paid dividends but there's no doubt the team will welcome to chance to internalize the system more so that they don't have to think about it as much on the ice.

Quotable

"We got outplayed and outhustled.

-Panthers' goalie Tomas Vokoun

"We have been the stronger team a couple of nights, but it's a matter of getting bounces. Tonight we got them."

-Brent Johnson

"It was a lucky goal. I was trying to shoot the puck to create a rebound for (Viktor) Kozlov, but it was a lucky rebound and went into the net."

-Alexander Ovechkin on his goal

DMG's 3 Stars
(1) Brent Johnson (24 saves on 25 shots; .960 save %)
(2) Alexander Ovechkin (1 goal, 1 assist, +2)
(3) Brian Pothier (1 goal, +2)

Quick Hits

• Man, I thought Denis Potvin was going to have a heart attack whining about how Ovechkin's cross-check on Horton should have been a major penalty. Funny how he neglected to mention it was the result of Horton shoving a Caps player in the chest after the play and how he didn't seem to have a problem with both Backstrom and Kozlov being on the receiving end of facewashes that ended being shoves to the head only minutes later.
• Quintin Laing is winning me over fast. Four blocked shots in the first game and two crucial ones in the closing seconds tonight. In just two days I've gone from wondering who the heck this guy is to wondering why he wasn't with the team sooner. If he keeps this up he should challenge Matt Bradley for ice time.
• For a smallish 20 year old guy who's game is built on skill Nicklas Backstrom sure isn't shy about digging around in front of the opponent's net.

Capitals Unable to Overcome Bad Luck; Worse Refs

Capitals 3, Hurricanes 4

I wrote on Friday that the Capitals had all too often been the victims of bad luck this year. It appears that's still the case.

When an opposing player misses the net, but hits someone else on his team in chest with the puck, which then falls at his feet for a tap in goal, you're dealing with some crap luck.

When you have an important late-period goal washed out because it failed to beat the buzzer by two tenths of a second, you're dealing with some crap luck.

When the other team scores from behind the goal line, by throwing the puck off your netminder and your best player's stick, you're dealing with some crap luck.

When the other team slashes your second-best offensive player in the offensive zone badly enough that he has to be helped off the ice with 15 seconds left and the result is a faceoff down near your goal and no penalty call you're dealing with some crap luck (and crap referees). Oh, by the way, Donald, next time the Caps play the 'Canes, take the two minute minor and ten minute misconduct and beat down Dennis Seidenberg.

When you lose a powerplay because your player (Mike Green) high-sticks the opposition (Chad LaRose after being hooked and is sent to the box you're dealing with some crap luck (and crap referees). That play should have resulted in a 5-on-3 for the Capitals since LaRose hooked Green and touched the puck before Green high-sticked LaRose. Instead 4-on-4 and an abbreviated 'Canes powerplay. Crap luck.

I have no idea what the Capitals have done to anger the hockey gods. Maybe it's that the Capitals don't have enough Canadians on the team (eight by my count), maybe the hockey gods are Japanese and hate their homeland's reputation being sullied by "Nanking", or perhaps it's just that Steve Stamkos is destined to be a Capital.

The Capitals still need to go on a run to get themselves back into the playoff picture and I still think they can do it, and will look for them to do so after Boudreau gets his five days off to work with the team without the pressures of a game. Picking up two against an inferior Panthers team tomorrow night is essential though.

I'm wondering if it would be worth it to start a section called "Laughlin's Laffers" where each game I'd chronicle the most absurd thing said by Craig Laughlin in the previous game's telecast. If I had such a section, tonight's would have been "I thought fans in Greensville were excited for hockey!" when he and Joe B. were discussing the move of the Hartford Whalers to Carolina. First of all, it's Greensboro, not Greensville. Secondly, the 'Canes played there for two seasons, in which they drew 9,086 and 8,188 fans per game.

Quick Hits

• After Ovechkin's early goal Laughlin noted "that's the way you quiet a crowd". Good point. I'm sure those 628 people in their seats at the game's start were making a hell of a lot of noise and really intimating the Capitals. Or maybe it was that the Calgary-esque "Sea of Red" from all the empty seats around the arena.
• What's the deal with the Hurricanes sounding the horn when an opposing team has a goal waived off?
  
• Nice first period for Laing. He skated 5:02, and had three blocked shots. Apparently he told Joe B. before the game all he wanted to do was be in the right position and grind it out. I believe that's called "knowing your role".
• From his gait I thought it looked obvious that Alexander Semin was in pain when he was skating. From the rest of his play it's obvious his hands aren't as deft as he's used to and he's still not used to playing at NHL game pace. That said I thought he was still quite effective at getting open in the offensive zone and making the Carolina defense either make plays or take penalties.
  
• Comcast briefly showed Donald Brashear running around the ice in his spandex shorts/jock and a windbreaker and, believe it or, it indicated to me part of the reason he's not a great hockey player: his legs didn't look particularly strong. If you notice, a lot of elite players in the NHL don't have massive upper bodies, but have really strong legs (Ovechkin is one of them). Makes sense given that the most important part of any players game is skating ability.
• Did you see Kolzig and LaRose nod to each other they were okay after their collision on the penalty shot and LaRose give Kolzig a little tap on the pads? It's stuff like that that makes me think hockey is the classiest sport at the pro level. Think about it - you never see NFL linemen ask the quarterback is he's okay after a sack (they're generally too busy prancing around).
• It wouldn't shock me to see Ovechkin one day pull a Bill Gramatica and hurt himself celebrating.