The Spring of Goals?

Lord knows, I wasn't sure these eyes would ever see a 6-5 game in the Stanley Cup playoffs again.

Happily, I was wrong.

Monday night's wild 6-5 double OT victory by the Montreal Canadiens over the Carolina Hurricanes was a thoroughly entertaining and thrilling contest. While it was the extreme, however, it wasn't the exception in a playoff year that is starting out very, very differently from the way the 2004 playoffs ended.

That year's final between Tampa Bay and Calgary included only 27 goals in seven games, an average of 3.8 goals per game in what was a mutual exhibition of holding and hooking.

In Monday's four playoff games alone, there were 35 goals. Tuesday, there were another 31.

The worst part of the '04 final was that over the course of the series, the team that scored first won every game. There wasn't one, single comeback.

In terms of entertainment, fans in those two cities might have loved it, but it was the lowest the NHL had sunk to in terms of a fun and entertaining product.

This spring, happily, has been very different.

So far, 20 games over four nights have included:

Ten successful comebacks, not including Philadelphia's return from a 2-0 deficit in Game 1 against Buffalo before losing in OT or Detroit's effort to fight back from being down 3-1 in the third Tuesday night to Edmonton before losing in double OT.

135 goals for an average of 6.7 per game, a slight increase from the regular season after years in which scoring went down in the playoffs.

An average of 13.9 power plays per game and 2.8 power play goals per game. Both figures might be higher than some would like, but its hardly a power play competition in each game. Overall, of the 135 goals scored, 56 (41 per cent) have been via the power play.

Scoring in bunches is back. Colorado has twice scored three goals in less than six minutes, and Dallas scored three in 4:17 Monday night. Nashville has scored three in 9:59, Ottawa managed three in 4:31, Buffalo potted three in 7:20 and Montreal produced a three-spot in 9:58. On Tuesday, the Sens came up with four goals in 13:18, while three teams - the Red Wings, Sharks and Flames - all scored twice in less than 70 seconds.

Clearly, the speed and intensity of competition is up and the hitting has been ferocious, yet the determination of the league to stand by its new rules standard is helping to create a more open, interesting game.

The incredible part is that some teams and some players are still under the impression that the rules are going to change. Players are still reaching out to hook a player on the arms from behind, and then throwing up their arms in disbelief when the whistle is blown.

But it's the referees who should be the disbelieving ones. After all, they've been making the same call all year long.

Those who would have the league return to the days of 2-1, 3-2, 2-0 results in virtually every playoff game might not like what they're seeing. They'd love to go back to the rodeo where the checkers, under the stupid "let the players play" credo were the heroes every night.

But those who would take the game back to that are in the minority.

Actually, they always were.

Comments

[JPZ]

All too true. I dare say you're on the money with this one (as opposed to your shootout misfire yesterday).
The real question is whether anyone will ever be nostalgic about the trap years. "Aaaah, remember when Jim Dowd and Trent Klatt used to do those crazy slow waltzes into the corner? What happened to those dances?"

[Derek]

I'm loving the playoffs so far. The Oilers are my team so I'm, of course, following that series but all the other series are great to watch too. The speed of the 'Canes/Habs game last night was phenomenal!

[Arthur]

I don't believe this article for a second. The only place I hear that sentiment trumpeted (fans are happy with the penalty crackdowns) is in the media.

Any fan I know (and I know plenty) who watched hockey this season hated the relentless penalty calls levelled on marginal infractions. It didn't matter if it was on the opponent of your favourite team - in a minute or two, your team would be submarined with a cheesy call of its very own to kill off. It was so bad that on multiple, countless occasions, play-by-play guys would replay the penalty call, and have nothing to analyze. "I think that's what it was called for..." I heard it ALL YEAR.

And now, with the Cup on the line, the situation is only magnified. What's so great about a 6-5 game? All I saw were a pair of sloppy defensive efforts by both Montreal and Carolina, with a handful of weak penalties interrupting the "exciting" action I was forced to endure. Good comebacks, though? What I see are contrivances designed to attract mouth-breathing American fans who can’t stand a disciplined hockey game.

“But those who would take the game back to that are in the minority. Actually, they always were.”

Unless a poll comes out proving it, these statements are meaningless. Let’s see how many fans are "in the minority" when their team is eliminated from the playoffs with an overtime loss because their star was sitting in the box for a phantom hooking call.

[Pete]

I totally agree, Damien. I remember those snorefests when the Toe Blake coached Habs would sit on an early 1-0 or 2-0 lead...

[greg in canada]

This year's playoffs so far have been the best I can ever remember, great skating, playmaking, incredible & legal hits. I think anyone who prefers the old league just can't keep up with the speed. The refs are still somewhat inconsistant with their calls, but I would rather see one extra call or missed hook than the old way of ignoring most of them including cross checks, and calling retaliation instead of calling the original infraction, basically giving a benefit to the team that cheated the most. With the hockey being as good as it is, it is getting downright addictive. I would like to see Ottawa win it all, but there are a lot of great teams playing this year.

[Garret]

The best part about all this is now that the speed has returned to the game, the checks are finally rattling the boards again, much to crowds' delight.

To Arthur, I know plenty of hockey fans like you ... the 'phantom call' in overtime was always a referee turning a blind eye to some low salary grinder effectively nullifying the skill advantage of the speedier, play-making marquee names. If 'defensively sloppy' means 2nd line blueliners not clutching a forward like a security blanket while the play is going through the neutral zone, count me in. And the vast majority of the hockey fans I've spoken too since the changes agree. You probably just discount somebody as a true 'hockey fan' unless they liked it in the super-glue era. It's real checking again .. no more cuddling!

[JPZ]

Yeah, I used to play hockey with guys like Arthur. I'm now in retirement (hopefully temporarily) because I couldn't stand listening to the boneheaded analyses made by pylon types weaned on too much Grapes. Don Cherry has been a parody of himself since 1983 or '84. I find it hilarious that the Ex- and Canadian-drinking crowd take everything he says as the gospel.

If you think the hockey was better and more "correct" before, then you are smoking or sniffing something pretty potent. Yes, there are too many calls this year . . . that's because the players are still being trained. They'll get used to it. And on balance it's a small price for the fan to pay to see the officials actually go by the rule book for the first time since . . . ?

[Arthur]

For those criticizing my post, it's obvious you missed the point.

I have no problem with penalties being called for legitimate infractions. But it's a fact, and it has been all year, that referees are often blowing the whistle for no reason. In the Montreal-Carolina game, one that stands out in particular in my memory (there's too many to remember them all) where Doug Weight was on his knees, and he reached up with his stick and tapped the side of a Montreal player. It barely brushed his jersey, and certainly had no effect on the play, but CBC was incredulous over the call. It embarrasses the game.

In addition, I didn't mention anywhere that I champion watching no-talent goons stopping up the play with blatant penalties.

JPZ, you discredit your arguments when you suggest my perception has been influenced by drugs.

I'll address one anyway - you say all the refs are doing is going to the rulebooks - I suppose you've never jaywalked, and your car never once exceeded 80 km/h? A law is a law, right?

"Discretion" should be the word of the day for playoff-bound referees, and so far they are exhibiting none. Why is the standard for playoff games suddenly so much higher than at the end of the season? It's impossible to "train" the players for an everchanging, arbitrary standard.

Let them play, but call each of the blatant fouls.

[Alok]

I would refer "Arthur" to the following numbers from a poll of the members of the NHL Fans Association (NHLFA), an association with membership of over 28,000. Namely, the following results are most applicable (collected before the playoffs started):
- 73% thought the refs are doing a good job
- 62% were fearful that standards would slip during the playoffs

Fans like Arthur are going the way of the dodo. Thank GOD!

[Marcel B. DesRoches]

I find this years playoffs the mosr exciting series in a long,long time. If the Leafs had made it to the post season I wonder if Derek and Arthur would have the same oppinion.Disgruntled Leaf fans get over it.The league and father time have passed you by.Start drafting and build within if you know so much Derek do your home work and you will find that teams like the Canadiens for instance have 10 players on their roster going back to Craig Rivest 3rd round 68th overall up to Mark Streit 2004 262nd overall.

[JPZ]

Yes, Arthur, I saw that call on Weight, too. Not a good call, but that happens in all sports. The refs will never be perfect . . . speaking of which, CBC commentators were also incredulous in another game that the refs were still often missing shots to the head or from behind, while calling too many of the Weight-type "infractions."

I agree that the refs need to make some adjustments, but the overall results are gratifying to say the least. The game is so much better served by having the officials clamp down on without-the-puck interference, slow waltzes into the corner, commonplace cross-checking in the slot, etc. Okay, I admit it, even fans of the sand and gravel style of hockey are sobre most of the time--I just don't agree with the molasses approach to the game.