New York Rangers at Washington Capitals
Sunday February 10th, 2008, 1:00 PM
TV: NBC CSN
Last Meeting: 12/13/2007, Capitals win 5-4 in overtime.

I am committed (time-wise) for the rest of Saturday, so the statistics given in this preview are current as of its posting, which is to say the do not include the results of the Rangers/Flyers game tonight.

Two days after relinquishing their brief stay at the top of the Southeast Division standings, the Capitals will try to right the ship in a matinée against the New York Rangers, who themselves know a little something about tightly packed divisions - in the Rangers home, the Northeast, the top four teams are separated by only five points.

About the Opponent
New York Rangers: 27-24-6, 60 points, 4th in the Northeast Division, 8th in the Eastern Conference

Team Leaders
Goals: tie - Chris Drury and Brendan Shanahan (17)
Assists: Scott Gomez (40)
Points: Scott Gomez (52)
Plus/Minus: Marcel Hossa (+7)
Penalty Minutes: Colton Orr (170)
Fights: Colton Orr (15)

Random Rangers Fact
Rangers center Scott Gomez once had a walk-on role on the soap opera “One Life to Live”.

Random Rangers Statistic
The Rangers big free agent acquisitions Scott Gomez and Chris Drury are on pace to combine for 41 goals and 130 points and are being paid a combined $17.1 million, meaning the Rangers are looking to be on the hook for $417,073.17 per goal and $131,538.46 per point for the duo this season.

Keys to the Game

Washington
Get the powerplay clicking. After going 0-7 against Carolina on Friday night the Caps dropped to 1-24 with the man advantage over the last eight games. You don’t necessarily have to pot a goal on the powerplay to win, but you do have to at least be a threat and get a little offensive momentum going.

New York
Play team defense. The Rangers have a number of solid defensemen but no great one, while the Capitals have several forwards who control the puck very well and can make plays. To avoid getting burned the Rangers are going to need to play smart defense as a five-man unit.

Players to Watch

Washington
Olaf Kolzig - Kolzig is obviously not happy about the way this season has gone for him or about the fact that he and Brent Johnson are essentially now in a platoon situation. The extra rest seems to be serving the 37-year-old veteran well though and combined with his ultra-competitive nature and the importance of games down the stretch, I’d look for him to get hot.

Alexander Semin - Semin only made it one game after being called out by Bruce Boudreau before he took another selfish penalty to take his team off a powerplay, and the lastest was the most egregious, giving up the man advantage with less than thirty seconds to play in the third and his team trailing by one. There are two subplots here: (1) how Semin responds to screwing up yet again and (2) whether he will be able to control his temper at all against a team that’s dressing Sean Avery, Ryan Hollweg and Colton Orr.

New York
Sean Avery - the league’s most hated player is the definition of the term ‘pest’ and is the best in the business. Although most of Washington’s tougher players (Donald Brashear, Matt Bradley, John Erskine) aren’t going to be goaded into the types of penalties Avery gets players to take, many of the Capitals more skilled players are prone to taking bad penalties from time to time (Alex Ovechkin, Tom Poti)…or more often than that (Semin). Last year’s playoff series against Atlanta demonstrated how much of an impact Avery can have if he gets under a team’s skin and if the Capitals let him do that they’re going to have a hard time cobbling together a win.

Henrik Lundqvist - Lundqvist has either been in the zone and on his game or looked lost for most of the season, rarely finding a middle ground. Which Lundqvist shows up for the Rangers will go a long way in determining the outcome of this game.

Around the (Inter)net
A Washington Times article about ‘Gang Green’, the official Mike Green fan club…Hockey Day in Canada, hosted from Eric Fehr’s hometown of Winkler, Manitoba…In his quest to outdo himself in stupidity, Mike Brophy is now championing the end of no trade clauses…a New York Times article about the Islanders and their attempt to move into the Chinese market…Capitals Art caricatures Alex Ovechkin…Joe Juneau takes a different approach to retirement than most…Damn you, Metro!

For anyone who hasn’t seen yet, Alex Ovechkin has signed his new contract with the Capitals and it’s a whopper: $124 million over 13 years.

Tarik has more details here.

I’m generally a pretty modest, reserved guy. In addition, two of the things I hate most is when people use their blogs to vent/rant and when people call names or insult other people. But you’ll have to excuse me this once because each of these journalists is guilty of at least one of the following:

(1) Chasing ridiculous rumors with no credibility
(2) Failing to understand the CBA
(3) Failing to do any research regarding the players in the Capitals organization
(4) Insulting the Capitals organization, the Capitals players, the Capitals fans and/or the city of Washington D.C.
(5) Pandering to fans in their home market
(6) Ignoring the facts in front of their faces

By doing this, all are guilty of failing to their job are journalists and consequently open themselves us to mockery by us mere mortals who aren’t paid to write about hockey, yet somehow know exponentially more and comment on it without smugness and without insisting that anyone who doesn’t write for a major new publications has opinions that don’t matter.

Let me just be perfectly clear: to be wrong, propose ideas that I (or other Caps fans think are silly) or have an opinion I disagree with is perfectly fine, and while I may criticize the article I won’t be rude to the author. But if an author is going to willfully ignorant (or even proud of their ignorance) or is going to insult Washington D.C., the Capitals or their fans as a substitute for research, insightful commentary and good writing, well then I take the Fire Joe Morgan approach: such authors do not deserve the respect of us fans and they will not get it.

That said…

Shut up, Larry Brooks, and realize that just because the Rangers are the most obnoxious franchise of the last fifteen years doesn’t entitle them to a damn thing. You know, when you’re done with your hissy fit.

Shut up, Jack Todd, and learn the names Mike Green, Nicklas Backstrom, Semen Varlamov, Michael Neuvirth, Alexander Semin, Karl Alzer, Josh Godfrey, Chris Bourque, Francois Bouchard, Jeff Schultz, Sasha Pokulok, Books Laich, Shaone Morrison and Bruce Boudreau before you say the Capitals have a lack of young talent or can’t win with the players they have now.

Shut up, Mike Brophy, and learn the meaning of the word “cosmopolitan” before you use it in an article suggesting it’s something D.C. is not. (note: the above tip to Jack would be a good one for you to follow as well)

Shut up, Bruce Garrioch, and learn when to trust a source and learn not to insult George McPhee’s intelligence.

Shut up, Eklund, and…just…stay shut up until you actually successfully predict an NHL personnel move (being signed to a13 year extension is almost the same thing as being traded to Nashville, right?)

Ted Kulfan, I won’t tell you to shut up because you were not rude, insulting or willfully ignorant. But you were wrong, and that’s one more article for Capitals fans to look at giggle while they sit back and simply say, “Thirteen years”.

And all of you - Larry, Jack, Mike, Bruce, Ted, Eklund - sit and listen to the one voice of reason I’ve found in all this madness: Spector of Fox Sports.

Thirteen years, Caps fans. Thirteen years.

To close, here’s Ovechkin on his extension:

I cannot say how happy I am. I didn’t want to go nowhere. If I want to go somewhere, I could sign for three years.

I decided I didn’t want to go anywhere, and they didn’t want lose me, so we signed a long-term deal. It won’t put more pressure on me. I will play the way that I always play.

Photo: AP

Mike Brophy is becoming my favorite hockey writer. Because he’s so damn easy to mock.

Apparently not satisfied with embarrassing himself to the hockey community with this gem about why the Capitals should looked to trade Ovechkin (my commentary here), Brophy has penned a new piece about why the NHL should retain the instigator penalty.

I’m not nuts about removing the instigator rule; I think good arguments can be made both for keeping it and eliminating it. I’m not going to attack Brophy for his opinion, but rather for his reasoning and writing. After much consideration (must have been at least four seconds) I decided to use the tried-and-true method favored by the pros at FireJoeMorgan.com. Thus I give you the glory of Mike Brophy.

You hear it nearly every week – get rid of the instigator rule.

…

While we’re at it, let’s arm motorists, so if somebody follows too closely or cuts you off, you can pull out your piece and shoot out their tires. Let’s give grocery store cashiers baseball bats so if somebody gets in the 10-or-fewer items line with 12, they can be kneecapped.

Best. Analogy. Ever.

I’m kind of tempted to just let that sit and speak for itself, but I feel that I have to dig beyond the superficial, surface level of idiocy that jumps out of this article. Because it’s just more fun that way.

The surface-level idiocy I referred to is the general absurdity of the analogy. But the ineffective use of analogy goes beyond that because it compares different things. And I just can’t let butchering of the English language stand.

The issue of the instigator rule is an issue of severity of punishment. What Brophy talks about in his analogy [motorists; grocery store clerks] is providing people with the means to commit a violent act more effectively. The instigator penalty does not deal with means to commit an illegal act. It deals with punishment. These are two very different things. Acceptable analogies using the same basic framework would include:

(1) “Removing the instigator penalty would be like reducing the jail time for shooting out someone’s tires because they cut you off from [current sentence] to [new, lesser sentence] - it’s just not enough of a deterrent.”

(2) “Arming motorists so they can shoot out the tires of people who have cut them off would be like giving grocery store cashiers baseball bats so if somebody gets in the 10-or-fewer items line with 12, they can be kneecapped or allowing NHL enforcer to carry sharpened sticks to injure players that have offended their team in some manner.”

I’ll assume Brophy didn’t go with option number one because it doesn’t have shock value and isn’t “clever” and didn’t go with option two because it makes no sense, since the issue of what equipment players can carry is not affected by the instigator rule. Why he chose to combine the two into a statement that makes even less sense is beyond me.

Oh, and let’s allow Chris Simon to drop his gloves and beat Ryan Hollweg to a pulp because Hollweg, who is not a fighter, has the audacity to hit him. Let’s let Chris Simon slug the snot out of Jarkko Ruutu because, like Hollweg, he banged the Islanders’ aging tough guy.

Keep in mind that this passage is already stupid because it references the aforementioned stupid and meaningless analogy. But then also consider this: “let’s allow Chris Simon to drop his gloves and beat Ryan Hollweg to a pulp because Hollweg, who is not a fighter, has the audacity to hit him“.

Now watch this.

It’s currently 6:56:01 PM, December 19. Ryan Hollweg fought 13 times in the 2006-07 season. It is now 6:56:45, December 19. It took me 44 seconds to research and write that.

I’m not a professional journalist in any sense. Especially not for one of the biggest hockey publications on the planet. I am a graduate student in Atlanta killing time and watching the replay of the Senators/Bruins game from last night. Yet I was willing and able to research this post before I posted it. Can’t Brophy do the same? And if he can’t (or isn’t willing to), and as a result makes such an obvious oversight, why should anyone take his opinion seriously?

Here’s a novel idea for NHL players – if you don’t like the way Ryan Hollweg or Jarkko Ruutu hit your teammates, hit them back. Drive them hard into the boards. Crunch them with an open-ice hit. Get even or, heaven forbid, drop your gloves and fight them whether they want to fight back or not. Take that whopping risk of receiving an extra minor penalty for being the instigator.

So then, just to recap:

Oh, and let’s allow Chris Simon to drop his gloves and beat Ryan Hollweg to a pulp because Hollweg, who is not a fighter, has the audacity to hit him. Let’s let Chris Simon slug the snot out of Jarkko Ruutu because, like Hollweg, he banged the Islanders’ aging tough guy. Give me a break.

then…

Here’s a novel idea for NHL players – if you don’t like the way Ryan Hollweg or Jarkko Ruutu hit your teammates, hit them back…drop your gloves and fight them whether they want to fight back or not. Take that whopping risk of receiving an extra minor penalty for being the instigator.

So…this article’s first point is that the idea that players should police themselves and fight is ridiculous (”give me a break”). This article’s second point is that the much better solution is to…fight with opposing agitators whether they want to or not.

Oh. Well, at least that’s clear.

Also, the phrase whopping risk of receiving an extra minor penalty for being the instigator is incorrect as well. Being the instigator results in a two minute minor, a five minute fighting major and a ten minute misconduct. Again, where’s the research, Brophy? For that matter, where are the editors?

The NHL will never, ever get rid of the instigator penalty. It would be so politically incorrect it defies consideration. The league says repeatedly it is comfortable with where fighting is now, largely because stiff penalties have eliminated nasty brawls. Fact is, we see more brawls in baseball than we do in hockey these days.

You think Gary Bettman is going to stand before a microphone and tell the world the league has decided, for the good of the game, the NHL will let goons run the show? Ain’t gonna happen, folks.

If the NHL can give a guy on his eighth suspension 30 games for a play that could have easily ended another player’s career and adversely affected his quality of life outside of hockey for the rest of his life less than a year after he used his stick like a baseball bat against a guy’s face (an infraction which resulted in only 25 games) and give a guy who attacked another play from behind, cracking several vertebrae and not only ending his NHL career but taking away the chance to ever play hockey again 20 games, I think they can justify removing the instigator penalty.

Contrary to the opinion of some, removal of the instigator penalty would not turn NHL games into brawls on a regular basis. Why? The aggressor penalty that’s still on the books in the NHL, which reads:

“The aggressor in an altercation shall be the player who continues to throw punches in an attempt to inflict punishment on his opponent who is in a defenseless position or who is an unwilling combatant. A player must be deemed the aggressor when he continues throwing and landing punches in a further attempt to inflict punishment and/or injury on his opponent who is no longer in a position to defend himself.”

With this rule on the books players are still protected from completely unprovoked attacks or from being attacked after they’ve gone into a defenseless position, but the
player who has challenged an opposing player to a fight won’t get an extra penalty for dropping their gloves first.

There’s a decent case to be made for the instigator penalty, folks. But this ain’t it.

Be sure to check back next week when Brophy advocates the return of the glowing puck!

….so I will too.

Thanks to (1) getting older and smarter (2) the internet as a means of fact-checking and (3) the genius that is FireJoeMorgan.com, I have discovered the joys of bad sports journalism. And boy do we have a whopper today, in the form of a Hockey News blog entry by Mike Brophy that argues the Capitals should trade Alexander Ovechkin (or at least look into trading him).

Read what Peerless (The Peerless Prognosticator) and CapsChick (A View From the Cheap Seats) had to say.

The argument goes something like: The Capitals aren’t winning with Ovechkin and he’s not going to be happy there and Washington doesn’t deserve him, thus they should trade him in a deal reminiscent of the Lindros-for-the-world swap.

Now for the fun part: picking apart this argument bit-by-bit.

Point #1: Ovechkin is/will be unhappy in Washington: But what if Ovechkin doesn’t want to play in Washington any longer?

Why Point #1 is stupid: Despite the fantasies of some bigger/older hockey markets Ovechkin hasn’t said anything to indicate he is unhappy in Washington. He say he likes the team, likes the fans, likes the city, likes his teammates and likes the direction the franchise is headed. He has said he wished he played in front of bigger crowds, but I’m sure he know that when the Caps starting winning, the fans will come. Maybe writers in other hockey markets are hoping that if they keep saying Ovechkin wants out of D.C., Ovechkin will decide that’s the case.

Point #2: Washington doesn’t deserve Ovechkin. What if the young superstar tells the Caps he’d prefer to play someplace a little more cosmopolitan than Washington?

Why Point #2 is stupid: With its highly educated and highly skilled workforce, abundance of restaurants/bars and myriad of cultural opportunities (including many of the world’s best museums, which are free), Washington clearly doesn’t stack up in terms of cosmopolitan-ness, right? Naturally Ovechkin will want to go to some other cultural hotbed like Detroit, Buffalo, Edmonton or Raleigh. This statement by Brophy is one of those ones that’s so stupid it makes the whole article lose credibility. If anything, the fact that Washington is so cosmopolitan hurts the Capitals because there’s so much else to do.

Really though this just comes down to another point writers have been trying to make - Washington doesn’t deserve Ovechkin. Why is that? Because the Capitals haven’t won a Cup? Philly hasn’t won one since 1975; Toronto since 1967, but I’d bet no one would complain they don’t deserve Ovechkin. Because of low attendance? Over the last ten years the Capitals have outdrawn the Bruins six times, even though Washington has been terrible for several years. Yet, would anyone claim Boston is not enough of a hockey town to deserve a player like Ovechkin?

Just for the record here’s my cosmopolitan-ness rankings for NHL cities:
(1) New York
(2) Washington
(3) Toronto

Point #3: The Capitals aren’t going to win any time soon. Let’s face it, with Ovechkin in their lineup, the Capitals have shown no signs of being a playoff team.

Why Point #3 is stupid: The Capitals are five points out of a playoff spot and seven points out of the division lead and fifth spot in the East. They’re 7-4-2 since Boudreau took over. They have this year beaten Ottawa and Detroit, in Ottawa and Detroit, when each team was the best in the league.

Point #4: The Caps don’t have enough young talent/enough depth. Let’s face it, with Ovechkin in their lineup, the Capitals have shown no signs of being a playoff team…There are no guarantees re-signing Ovechkin will make the Capitals a successful franchise. In fact, if history has taught us anything, moving a young star just might be the best medicine for a struggling team…[discussion of Lindros trade]

Why Point #4 is stupid: No young talent? No depth on the team or in the farm system? Alexander Semin, Shaone Morrison, Boyd Gordon, Matt Pettinger, Nicklas Backstrom, Mike Green, Jeff Schultz, Karl Alzner, Josh Godfrey, Semen Varlamov, Michael Neuvirth, Chris Bourque, Francois Bouchard, Sasha Pokulok. Yeah, the Capitals need more young talent.

Point #5: The Capitals could get a haul similar to what the Nordiques got for Lindros. When the franchise was still located in Quebec, Eric Lindros put a gun to the team’s head, demanding a trade. The Nordiques considered a few options and ultimately traded Lindros for a package that included Peter Forsberg, Ron Hextall, Chris Simon, Mike Ricci, Kerry Huffman, Steve Duchesne, a first round draft pick and $15 million.

Why Point #5 is stupid: The Nordiques got six players for Lindros, $15 million and two first round picks. The six players were: a sure-fire Hall of Famer and probably the most dominant player in the league in his prime (Forsberg), a very good goalie (Hextall), a tough guy with some skill (Simon), a great defensive player with good offensive upside (Ricci), a solid defenseman (Huffman) and a great offensive defenseman (Duchesne).

Who even has that kind of talent in the NHL with the parity that exists? I’d say the best team in terms of young talent are Los Angeles and Pittsburgh. With that in mind I give you Mike Brophy’s potential trade ideas:

Ovechkin to Los Angeles for Kopitar (Forsberg), Johnathon Bernier (Hextall), Jack Johnson and Brad Stuart (Huffman and Duchesne), Alexander Frolov (Ricci) and…someone else who’s analogous to Simon. Oh yeah, and $15 million dollars, adjusted upwards for twenty years of inflation. And two first round draft picks.

Ovechkin to Pittsburgh for Malkin (Forsberg), Fleury (Hextall), Staal (Ricci), Orpik and Gonchar (Huffman and Duchesne), and again someone unknown who’s analogous to Simon. Oh yeah, and $15 million dollars, adjusted upwards for twenty years of inflation. And two first round draft picks.

What do you think, guys? Would Pittsburgh or L.A. go for it? I bet they would! Because handing over money and cost-controlled skilled youngsters is a formula for success in the salary cap era of the NHL! Oh, wait….

Plus, I still don’t think either of those trades would be as good as what Quebec got for Lindros.

Point #6: It would be a good idea for the Capitals. [whole article]

Why Point #6 is stupid: Washington’s fans are already skeptical of management’s commitment to win and whether the Capitals can achieve success and trading Ovechkin could deal a blow to the fan base that it may never recover from.

Conclusion: This article is stupid and Mike Brophy probably knows it. But it’s getting people to talk about it, write about it, and visit The Hockey News website.