Bruins Leave it Late in Ottawa

The Bruins took an important 2 points out of their game with the Senators last night. However, some things about this team still concern me.

The Power Play remains absolutely useless. They don't even get shots on goal. And that's inexcusable. How do you not get shots to the net when you have more players than your opponent?

This team isn't scoring. The Seguin-Bergeron-Marchand line is producing, but every other set of forwards is struggling. Dennis Seidenberg scored the game-winner in the 3rd. And although Daniel Paille, normally of the 4th line, scored in the 2nd, it was because of Tyler Seguin's net-drive, which drew the attention of the Ottawa defense.

The Bergeron line has become the first line. The Krejci and Peverly lines have become ineffective.

This team WILL NOT advance far in the Stanley Cup playoffs with only one line and a useless Power Play.

The Bruins are in Toronto Saturday night. Then the Leafs are in Boston on Monday. Then the Habs come to town on Wednesday. This is a key stretch of divisional play. The B's are 2 points behind Montreal, with a game in hand.

Photo Credit:
AP Photo/The Canadian Press, Fred Chartrand

Lose-ipeg

Can you lose a game because of your Power Play?

Yes.

The ineffectiveness of the Bruins' Power Play is the primary reason they lost to the Winnipeg Jets last night. The Bruins were given multiple chances to add to their lead, and they never did. The best way to protect a 1-goal lead is to make it a 2-goal lead. The Bruins struggled to even get shots on goal with their PP unit, which is simply inexcusable.

How can you not get a single shot on goal in 2 minutes when you have 5 skaters and your opponent has 4? How is that possible? How is it possible to do it again?!?

Why is it that Ryan Spooner, in his 2nd career NHL game, gets 3:34 Power Play ice-time?

Why?

This lack of a minimally effective Power Play has cost the Bruins a handful of games this season. And I'm concerned that in the playoffs it might cost them 1 or 2 games in a series, and that will be the difference between advancement and elimination.

I'm becoming alarmed with two other issues the Bruins are having...

#1: Inability to hold leads in the 3rd period.

#2: Apparent fatigue.

The Bruins under Claude Julien have been renowned for their ability to hang on to a lead. They simply don't lose when they have a lead in the 3rd period. That was the past. Now, they seem to struggle in the 3rd period. That is mildly alarming.

The fatigue issue raises a red-flag that is larger and brighter. Because there is no reasonable explanation for it. The Bruins are reasonably young. Other teams are playing similarly condensed schedules. And Julien prides himself on rolling 4-lines, not giving all the ice-time to just the top 10 skaters. And it's not as if Anton Khudobin is playing poorly when Rask rests.

This team is getting outworked, out-skated, out-everything late in games. And there's just no excuse for it. It's a job. Time to work.

Bruins are in Ottawa Thursday night.

Photo Credit:
AP Photo/The Canadian Press, Trevor Hagan

NHL Realignment: Good Divisions, Confusing Playoffs

The NHL is realigning from 6 divisions to 4. The good news for the Bruins is that the 5 teams currently in their division will remain together, with the exciting addition of the Detroit Red Wings, and the less exciting additions of the Florida Panthers and Tampa Bay Lightning. Here's how the NHL will look starting next season:

EASTERN CONFERENCE:
Division A:
Boston Bruins
Toronto Maple Leafs
Montreal Canadiens
Buffalo Sabres
Ottawa Senators
Detroit Red Wings
Florida Panthers
Tampa Bay Lightning

Division B:
Columbus Blue Jackets
Carolina Hurricanes
Washington Capitals
Pittsburgh Penguins
Philadelphia Flyers
New York Rangers
New Jersey Devils
New York Islanders

WESTERN CONFERENCE:
Division C:
Winnipeg Jets
Chicago Blackhawks
Colorado Avalanche
Dallas Stars
Minnesota Wild
Nashville Predators
St. Louis Blues

Division D:
Vancouver Canucks
Calgary Flames
Edmonton Oilers
LA Kings
Anaheim Ducks
San Jose Sharks
Phoenix Coyotes

The playoffs will also be modified. In a very complicated and puzzling way. It will still be divided by Conference. It will also be divided by division. Bear with me as I try to explain...

The top 3 teams from each division will qualify for the playoffs. Then the best 2 teams, from either division, will qualify as wild cards. The division winner with the best record will face the wild card team with the worst record, regardless of division. The other division winner will face the other wild card team. The 2nd and 3rd place teams in a division will face each other. Then the winners of these series will face each other in the Divisional Championship round.

So, here is how it could look...

Division A winner vs. Wild Card #2
Division A 2nd place vs. Division A 3rd place

The winners of each series would face each other, then the winner of that series would face the Division B winners in the Conference Championship. Then the winner of that goes to the Stanley Cup Finals.

I absolutely fucking HATE this new playoff format. If it ain't broke, don't fix it, and the playoffs weren't broke. The playoffs were great. They were thrilling. They spawned non-divisional rivalries like Chicago/Vancouver, Chicago/LA, Boston/Vancouver, Boston/Philadelphia.

And they were simple. 1 vs. 8, 2 vs. 7, 3 vs. 6, 4 vs. 5.

Try explaining this new format to your girlfriend.

And as much as I love a regular season schedule weighted for divisional rivalries, it feels forced in the playoffs. And I kind of like the possibility of facing a rival like Montreal in the Eastern Conference Finals. How cool would it be if there were a way to meet a divisional rival in the Stanley Cup Finals?

This realignment solves some problems and creates others. Detroit and Columbus, who play in the Eastern Time Zone, will benefit from playing more games in their own time zone, and less games on the West Coast. Winnipeg is finally in a geographically logical division. Most divisional rivalries (such as Montreal/Boston, Pittsburgh/Philly, Edmonton/Calgary) remain intact. And other previously non-divisional rivalries (such as Washington/Pittsburgh) now have an opportunity to flourish.

Some drawbacks are obvious already. There are 14 teams in the West, 16 in the East. Eight teams from each Conference will make the playoffs. So it will be easier for Western teams to make the postseason.

There's also the fact that the two Florida teams were attached to perhaps the most powerful division (in terms of fan support and history). Once again, instead of eliminating or adjusting its weakest links, the NHL will support them, at the expense of their strongest franchises. The Lightning and Panthers will benefit at their box office when the Red Wings, Bruins, Maple Leafs, and Canadiens come to town.

The NHL will never contract, unfortunately. The owners don't want to lose the markets, the players don't want fellow players to lose their jobs, and there are five people in Phoenix who really like the Coyotes. These people are stopping contraction.

We'll see how the new divisions work. There is never going to be a perfect solution. This isn't bad.

We'll also see how the new playoffs go. Based on current NHL standings, here's what the first round matchups would be:

East:
Detroit vs. Montreal
Ottawa vs. Boston

Toronto vs. Pittsburgh
New Jersey vs. Carolina

West:
Phoenix vs. Chicago
Minnesota vs. St. Louis

Winnipeg vs. Anaheim
Los Angeles vs. Vancouver

That's not bad, not bad at all. I think every year facing the same team in the playoffs could be a double-edged sword. It would be great for a good rivalry. It would be tedious if the teams weren't evenly matched, or if one were from Florida.

As a Bruins fan, we keep the rivalries from our own division, and we add Detroit. Four of the Oriignal Six teams are in our division. Add the rabid fanbases in Ottawa and Buffalo, and you've got some great crowds, great buildings, great games. And then there's the two Spring Break teams.

Why I'm Not Getting Emotional Over Wes Welker

Hey, fellow Patriots fans. Before you continue acting like losing Wes Welker is the end of the world, I have two facts for you to consider.

#1. Wes Welker was on this team for 6 seasons, and the Patriots won 0 Super Bowls.

#2. During that same time, 6 teams which did not have Wes Welker won 6 Super Bowls.

In other words, having Wes Welker doesn't guarantee winning. And not having him does not guarantee losing. There is a future for this franchise without Wes Welker.

I'm not happy to see him go. He was great here. NOBODY in the NFL could do what he did at the level he did it. The notion that his production and importance to the offense can be replaced by Danny Amendola or anyone else is utterly absurd. Without Welker, no matter who the Patriots acquire, the offense will be forced to change dramatically.

That being said, I'm going to reserve any strong emotional reactions until the off-season is complete.

The Patriots didn't think Welker was worth $6 million. Their offer was suspiciously close, but still too low for Welker to take. Did the Patriots offer him the $5M, then he got the $6M offer from Denver? Or was the order reversed? If the Patriots made their offer AFTER Denver, then they evidently didn't want him on the team anymore.

Why? Who knows? Maybe he has concussion issues, maybe they were worried about his future durability, maybe they want receivers that are more physical. Whatever. I am a "In Bill We Trust" guy, so I will trust the Patriots to figure out how to develop an offense without Welker. I sincerely hope that it's not the same kind of offense, relying on Julian Edelman in the slot. We got a sneak preview of that early in the 2012 season and it was a nightmare.

I heard some people, most vocally Michael Felger of 98.5, point out this "shopping at Wal-Mart" style of the Patriots is why they haven't won a Super Bowl since the 2004 season. Felger points to 2006, when the Patriots let Deion Branch go to Seattle.

Some people who are upset to see Welker leave seem to have selective memories about why the Patriots haven't won as many Super Bowls as they could these last 6 seasons...

I'm not saying you discard Welker because of this drop or his drop in the AFC Championship game. But don't revise history to suit your emotional argument. Don't forget that this drop was huge. And that despite the "Patriot Way" of bargain hunting, which is being so heavily critiqued for not delivering a title, it would have resulted in a title if Welker had done his job and caught this pass.

So calm down, people. This move, by itself, hurts. But let's at least wait and see what the Patriots do this off-season before throwing temper tantrums.

Bruins Show Up Late, Still Beat Ottawa

Recapping this game is very simple. The Bruins played a crappy 1st period, then a good 2nd period, then Tuukka Rask won the shootout for them.

This was a close game, to state the obvious. The Bruins were somewhat fortunate to only allow 2 goals in the 1st period. And Shawn Thornton's goal in that period was also helped by some fortunate ricocheting. The Bruins were, at times, careless with the puck. That allowed Ottawa to take a 2-0 lead. And against a healthier, deeper team, such mistakes could be fatal.

On a positive side, Jordan Caron is what Chris Bourque tries to be, only Caron is actually capable of winning battles. Caron knows his role, knows how to win a loose puck, and knows how to fit in his line. Caron makes his line-mates better, Bourque made his line-mates worse.

The Bruins face the Penguins tonight. This will be a true test.

Photo Credit:
AP Photo/The Canadian Press, Fred Chartrand

I Hate the Phrase "Punched Their Ticket"

This is the time of year when I become obsessed with basketball. The other 11 months I don't really care about the sport. At least not as much as football, hockey, baseball, soccer, curling, et cetera. But in March I can't get enough of the game. The mid-majors, the upsets, the buzzer beaters. The MVC, the OVC, the WCC, the ACC, the Atlantic 10, the Big Ten, the Big XII, the Big East. It's a relentless barrage of tension and thrills.

However, there is one thing about this time of year that threatens to give me a rage-induced conniption...

The phrase "punched their ticket," and all associated forms.

It's such a tired, worn-out, overused, out-of-date, unoriginal, uninteresting sports cliche. You hear it and read it constantly, in highlight reels and game recaps. "Florida Gulf Coast was the first team to punch their ticket," "Belmont punched their ticket for the third straight year," "Harvard punched their ticket because there's no tournament in the Ivy League," "Liberty punched their ticket despite 20 losses." Every conference tournament is another ticket punched. So many tickets. So many punches. So many times this same phrase is used.

The problem is, there's no other quick and colorful way to say "earned a berth in the NCAA tournament."

We must come up with another phrase. This level of repetition is unacceptable for a writer. Not to mention how out-of-date the phrase is. How often do you have a ticket that's punched these days? Here are some suggested replacements:

"Won a berth" is the most basic substitute. Although there's no flare to that. And in Sportswriting 101, future sports media are instructed to use as many formulaic, hackneyed expressions as possible, in an effort to make their writing appear interesting (see: "three-point land")

"Penetrated the bubble." I'm not sure this makes much sense, as most teams that win conference tourneys aren't bubble teams. But it sounds good. And kind of dirty.

"Date with 68." I like this, even though teams would technically have a date with 67 teams. It rhymes, it's catchy, and you can still use it when the Tournament expands to 128 teams.

"Cashed in." There's lots of money to be made by an NCAA appearance. And for USC's basketball program, this phrase is especially appropriate.

"Stamped their name on the bracket." Kind of long, but it's clear, active, and more up-to-date.

"Earned a slash." This can be used for teams that will be forced to go through one of the play-in games. Liberty, with their 20 losses, definitely earned a slash.

These are the humble suggestions of one sports fan who likes to write, and who hates hearing the same stupid phrases over and over again. I'm sure the truly great sportswriters out there, if there are any, can come up with something better. If only they tried to do so.

Why Were the Red Sox So Careful With Mike Napoli, Yet So Carefree With David Ortiz?

David Ortiz has been "shut down" for 5 to 7 days, due to inflammation in both heels. I don't know how you shut down a player who was barely active. Anyway, this is a significant setback for David Ortiz and his Achilles injury, and will likely push his return past Opening Day.

You probably remember that this injury started out as a minor issue. The Sox didn't even want to put him on the DL. That was about 9 months ago. It just went on and on. What was supposed to be a 500 word essay on Russian history has turned into the 1,200 pages of Tolstoy's War and Peace.

I'd peg the over/under on games Ortiz plays this season at 80.5. And I think I'm being generous.

What perturbs me is that the Red Sox were so very cautious about signing Mike Napoli due to injury concerns, eventually haggling with him for a discounted contract. With Ortiz there was no worry at all. Here was a 37 year old DH, with an injury that wasn't healing, and the Sox quickly gave him a 2 year, $26 million deal.

Would any other team have come close to paying Ortiz that much? Yet the Red Sox seemed eager to keep their sidelined star on the roster. I wonder why...

To be fair, the Sox did put a condition in Ortiz's contract. Ortiz gets $3 million more in 2014 if in 2013 he spends fewer than 20 days on the DL due to his Achilles injury. In other words, the Red Sox didn't protect themselves, but they will give a bonus to Ortiz for simply having a healthy Achilles.

I can't help but hypothesize that PR had something to do with the way the Red Sox handled Ortiz. There was little medical scrutiny, no delay, just a quick contract for the player who has become the grinning face of the franchise. The Sox signed the name, and didn't much care about the player. Wouldn't be the first time.

I have similar concerns over Jacoby Ellsbury still being on the roster. From a strictly baseball standpoint, it would make sense to shop Ellsbury around, especially if he's going to leave at the end of the season and you're not too optimistic about World Series contention in 2013. And it would make sense to let Ortiz go, or at least sign him to a deal similar to Napoli's. But then whose t-shirts would The Souvenir Store sell? Who would the pink hats ogle as he bends over in center-field? Who would the poor diehards cheer for with none on and 2 outs in the bottom of the 1st

I think the Red Sox are trying to tread water for the next 2-3 seasons. They want to field a semi-competitive team with a few marquee names. A team that will flirt with .500 and with the Wild Card spots. They might not sell Fenway out every night, but they want to avoid a young rebuilding team of no-names that will only draw 18,000 on a brisk Tuesday night in April.

Are they once again trying to be too clever in their effort to buy 3rd place? Or will it work? Will they win 85 games for a few seasons, then build a 95 win World Series winner?

Just like with Ortiz's injury, time will tell. Lots and lots of time.

Maple Syrup vs. Salsa, Canada and Mexico Brawl at WBC

Brief sequence of events:

Canada was up 9-3 when a Canadian bunted for a single. Normally this would be against an unwritten rule, but run differential is a tie-breaker in this tournament, so it's not clearly black and white in this instance.

A Mexican pitcher repeatedly threw at the next Canadian batter, eventually hitting him in the back.

The Canadian batter walked toward the mound, the benches emptied, a melee ensued. A melee which involved Red Sox reliever Alfredo Aceves.

Some thoughts..

The bunt single, even with that run differential tie-breaker, is still a douchebag move. And maybe in the next WBC, they can modify that tie-breaker so the most positive run differential a team can have in a single game is 5. So if a team is up by 10 runs or 20 runs, they still get credit for +5 and no more. That way teams up by 7 or 8 runs won't continue to pile on in the 9th.

No need to throw at the next Canadian batter. It's an exhibition tournament, Mexico was essentially eliminated. It was just a childish reaction to a meaningless bunt.

Baseball hitters have become unbelievable babies. They get hit in the back or the butt, then act like the pitcher just threw a baseball at their mother's face. Over the last few decades batters have become insufferable whiners when pitchers throw inside. This Canadian got hit in the back, not the head, not the wrists, and wasn't at all injured. And he turns it into a brawl.

There's a prevailing attitude that if a batter is hit, he has the right to charge the mound. And that's bullshit.

And Canada, if run differential was so important to you, wouldn't you take the free base from the HBP? Wouldn't that please you? It would help precious your tie-breaker!

As the fracas simmered, a Canadian coach got a full water bottle thrown at him (that's why many sports venues don't give you bottles with caps on them), and then Canadian short-stop Cale Iorg threw it back into the crowd, which is an extremely stupid thing to do. How do you guarantee you hit the right person? Did Iorg even know who he was throwing at?

The PA system implored the crowd to calm down, making announcements in English and Spanish. I'm surprised no Quebecois have complained that announcements weren't also made in French.

This kind of douchebaggery reminds me of the Canadian National Hockey Team. I wouldn't call them dirty, but they push rules as far as they'll bend. They act like jerks, then whine and complain when other teams push them back a bit or when things don't go their way. Canadians are typically very nice, considerate people. Until they're playing a sport and then they turn into pricks.

I'm going to start calling Canadians who participate in this kind of misbehavior Eh-holes.

Photo Credit:
AP Photo/Matt York