Friday Roundup/Habs 3, Caps 2 (OT)

[Boxscore - Recap]

Time after time this season, especially early on, Olie Kolzig has masked some of the defensive shortcomings of his teammates with his outstanding play in net. Sure, it's often been akin to putting lipstick on a pig, but hey, if you've gotta date the sow, you'll take as much makeup as she's willing to wear [overdone metaphor alert!]. Point being, Kolzig has picked up his teammates all season (the Caps have only won four games all year in which Kolzig has allowed three goals, compared to, say, the Hurricanes, who have won 16 times when Martin Gerber has been beaten three times). Even through the first two periods, the only reason the Caps were in the game was Kolzig's stellar play in goal and some strong penalty-killing. But late Thursday night it was the team's turn to pick Olie up, as the netminder let in one of his worst goals of the year midway through the third period.

"Unfortunately, I gift-wrapped the second goal for them," Kolzig would later say of his stick-handling blunder that gave Montreal a 2-1 lead and would be the only power-play goal the Caps yielded in 10 chances shorthanded. "I felt horrible." The Tarik el-Bashir described the go-ahead goal:

Halpern had won a faceoff deep in Washington's zone after a Capitals penalty and tipped the puck back to Kolzig, who reached to control the puck with his stick. But instead of gaining control of it, he redirected it onto the stick blade of Canadiens center Christopher Higgins, who netted his second goal of the game with 11:37 remaining.

Though they could have easily packed it in at that point, there is no quit in these Capitals and nearly a dozen minutes later, with Kolzig watching from the bench after being pulled for the sixth attacker, captain Jeff Halpern banged home a loose puck on a goal-mouth scramble to tie the game with 2.5 seconds left. The Caps had indeed bailed Kolzig out and the game would head to overtime, but the storybook ending wasn't to be as Saku Koivu beat Kolzig on a breakaway in the extra session that Olie thought he had stopped. As the puck trickled through and the crowd of more than 21,000 erupted, however, he knew he hadn't made the save and the Caps suffered about as gut-wrenching a loss as a team 25 points out of a playoff spot with ten games left can have.

Now it's off to Ottawa for a date with the high-flyin' (though defensively-depleted) Sens, nation's capital-à-nation's capital.

Finally, with another visit to a Canadian rink, another couple of nice pieces on Alex Ovechkin from north of the border, the first from the CP. Included therein, this quote from the Caps' superstar:

When I came here, I was a bit nervous. I only knew one player, Dainius Zubrus, but now I know all the guys. We're like a big family. If we lose, we lose together, and if we win, we are happy together. We do everything together. It's very important.

Awww. Can you feel the love? The second article is from the Montreal Gazette bemoaning the number of penalties called against the Caps because they kept AO off the ice. That's right - fans (who lustily cheered Alex during the player introductions) and writers alike in Montreal so appreciate Sasha's talent that they want to see more of him during the game, even if it results in its likely outcome (i.e. goals against the Habs):

[H]ad [Ovechkin] picked up his 50th here he would have had the Full Monty, a standing ovation from the NHL's biggest and liveliest crowd.

Now those are hockey fans. Of course, the article devolves into "bitter Canadian writer" mode, but we don't need to go there. We don't need to, but we will:

If [Ovechkin] completes his quest in Washington, where that thoroughly rinky-dink organization is drawing flies, the feat will likely be witnessed by the Zamboni driver, a few NHL officials and the wealthy characters in the private box of owner Ted Leonsis.

That's the problem with this story: Ovechkin is the league's hottest young property, the almost certain winner of the Calder Trophy, arguably the most dangerous and exciting player in the NHL at age 20. And he's playing, like rookie rival Sidney Crosby, in a city where the team is on life support [he must be an avid reader of Damien Cox].

What a waste.

Who're you calling a wealthy character, pal? Oh, and by the way, how are the Expos looking this spring?

Thread of the Day: NHL Separated At Birth - Ever seen Ken Hitchcock and Captain Kangaroo in a room together? How about Mike Modano and Jon "Napolean Dynamite" Heder? For more, click on the thread.

Elsewhere 'Round the Rinks:

• Happy 78th Birthday to Gordie Howe, Happy 41st Birthday to Tom Barrasso and Happy 35th Birthday to Pavel Bure. Six Stanley Cups, two Olympic silver medals, six Harts, six Rosses, two Calders, a Vezina, a Jennings, seven Richards (or equivalent), 1238 career goals, 2677 career points, 2504 career penalty minutes and 369 career wins. Nice trio of birthday boys, eh?
  

Daily Awards

• Hart: Brendan Shanahan (Game-winning goal, assist, fight... ding! ding! ding!... +2 in 4-2 win at Nashville)
  
• Ross: Mike Johnson (3 points)
  
• Norris: Jaroslav Spacek (Goal, assist, +1, 2 hits)
  
• Vezina: Dwayne Roloson (20-save shutout win, assist)
  
• Richard: Christopher Higgins, Dmitri Afanasenkov, Steven Reinprecht (2 goals each)
  
• Calder: Christopher Higgins (2 goals, +2)
  
• Aiken: Evgeni Nabokov (Loss, 4 goals on 27 shots against)
  

From The Silly To The Lazy And Back Again

In a "special" to ESPN.com, Toronto Star columnist Damien Cox tells us that "we shouldn't nitpick Crosby, Ovechkin's play." Aside from the grammatical issue I take with the headline (it should be "Crosby's, Ovechkin's play", as they don't share a single on-ice performance), the article itself is rife with the kind of reporting that is all too prevalent in sports journalism these days - a writer coming up with a thesis and then trying to cram his evidence into the mold he's made, rather than letting the facts lead him to a conclusion.

For the sake of organization, we'll take Cox's claims in the order they appear in the article. Batter up!

Ovechkin and Crosby came into this season with such a hurricane of hype behind them, it would have taken a truly sensational individual performance to have nudged one or the other out of contention.

The fact of the matter is that one of these rookies (I'll let you decide which one) came into the season with a "hurricane of hype" while the other entered the campaign with maybe a steady rain of publicity. Perhaps even a thunderstorm of buildup. But certainly not a hurricane of hype. And there has been a "truly sensational individual performance" that should nudge one of the two forwards out of contention. Which brings us to:

The Russian scoring whiz seems to have the edge in Calder consideration, but the vote is expected to be close, making this year's rookie race one of the most memorable between two sensational scorers ... [as the two] arm wrestle for the coveted silverware.

Henrik Lundqvist is 30-10-9 (9th in the League in wins with fewer losses than all but one of the men ahead of him) with a goals against average of 2.15 (3rd) and a save percentage of .925 (3rd) - how is he not in the running for the Calder in Cox's world? Oh, and if Sid and Alex did arm wrestle for the Calder, my money's on the Russian.

Now Cox gets to the meat of his article - the bashing of the two players in the article in which he tells us (right in the title, no less) not to bash the two players.

Along with the attention and the praise, however, gradually has come a sense that as the NHL season grinds on, both young men are either finding themselves victims of over-exposure or revealing warts that previously might not have been detected.

I'd take issue with him lumping together a season's worth of "Crosby is a crybaby" (his word) articles with one isolated blemish on Alex's otherwise-spotless record, but that's the least of my quibbles, and I covered an integrally-related point here. On to the substance of Cox's analysis:

In Ovechkin's case, the most negative moment of his sparkling season came in a game against the Montreal Canadiens on March 20, when he was benched 14 minutes, including the last three minutes of the second period and first 11 of the third.

The reason? Coach Glen Hanlon was biting his tongue afterward, but close observers believed Hanlon finally had enough of Ovechkin's penchant for taking overly long shifts. In that game, the explosive rookie averaged 58 seconds for each of his 20 shifts, too long in a league in which 45 seconds is considered a long outing.

The next game against Florida, Ovechkin played 35 shifts, and cut his average sortie down to 47 seconds. But by the following match against Tampa Bay, he was back up to one minute and four seconds, perhaps a not-so-subtle message from burgeoning star to the coach of a team with a losing record. [Emphasis added]

The first two paragraphs are accurate enough, but the third is lazy journalism run amok. In the Florida game, Ovechkin had 27:44 of ice time on 35 shifts - 47 seconds per shift, as Cox noted. The following game against Tampa, sure enough, Alex's shifts were up to an average of 1:04. But what Cox doesn't tell you (because he probably has no idea) is that it was due in large part to six consecutive minutes of power-play time during which Hanlon called a timeout so he could keep his top unit and his superstar on the ice. Ovechkin's ice time for the game was actually down two minutes from the Florida game. And what about the games since then? On Saturday night in Carolina he had 25 shifts for 22:25 of ice time (54 seconds per shift) and last night he had 25 shifts for 18:52 of ice time (45 seconds per shift - still too long for Cox's liking). In fact, for the year Ovechkin has averaged 53.25 seconds per shift, 29th highest in the League. I really doubt anyone is sending any not-so-subtle messages, other than the one that Cox is sending that he doesn't care to do much research in order to substantiate his assertions.

And what about Cox's claim that the NHL is a "league in which 45 seconds is considered a long outing"? Of the top 100 scorers in the League, only eight average less than 45 seconds per shift (rounded to the nearest second), and only one of those eight (Brian Rolston) is in the top 75 in scoring. Interesting. I guess Cox meant that 45 seconds is considered a long outing for second, third and fourth line players.

Cox goes on to detail the reputation Crosby has earned, complete with quotes from opposing players, before telling us that all of these criticisms "amount to nothing more, really, than nitpicking" and that both players are remarkably mature for their respective ages, especially since both play for horrid teams (Cox notes that Lundqvist has had it easier playing for a winning team that, we can only infer, has little to do with the Swede's play).

The underlying point that Cox is trying to get across is that there is not much difference between Crosby and Ovechkin and the seasons they've had. This fits right in with the theory that the Canadian media is trying to hype a Calder race where there isn't one (that is, with respect to Crosby and Ovechkin), and it is somewhat artfully done in the guise of a piece purporting to praise both players. Of course, if all the criticisms was really unwarranted and/or just nitpicking, Cox wouldn't have written them into the article (it's somewhat reminiscent of when Fox News Channel pretends to be doing their role as informer by reporting on one of Matt Drudge's borderline-slanderous claims, knowing full well all they're really doing is fanning the flames).

Luckily for us, the article soon comes to a close, but not before Cox, who has saved perhaps his best for last, announces that "[b]oth players have been godsends for franchises with very murky futures in their current locations," thereby breaking news to Caps fans, players, and no doubt majority owner Ted Leonsis alike that their team may not be long for Washington. I'll give Cox this much - at least he ends his article where it started, in utter ridiculousness.

Update: Eric at Off Wing Opinion has some thoughts on this article as well.