Home | Away

Friday, May 05, 2006

Round two NHL playoff predictions:  exclusive!  must credit michaelberube.com!

Apparently there’s a rumor going around the Internets that I’ve been “hiding out” on other blogs because of the mixed success of my NHL playoff predictions.

What mixed success?  I was 4-for-4, folks.  I did the incomprehensible, the mind-blogging, the remarkably fearless thing and predicted that all four top seeds in the East would win.  My colleague Scott Lemieux somehow failed to foresee that all four top seeds in the West would lose, including his beloved Flames, and . . . well . . . let’s turn that part of the report over to Scott, shall we?  Now that his Flames and my Rangers are out playing golf, he notes, “neither of us have any of those pesky ‘rooting interests’ to affect our shrewd discussion.”

Here’s Scott:

Now that I’ve recovered from responding to the Flames’ ugly collapse in a blizzard of cocaine, hookers, and heartbreak motoroil Bombay gin (well, actually it was some V-8 and half an Ambien; I’m a feminist who had a bad cold), I can now offer my take on Round 2. It’s generous of Michael to invite me back, given that I sullied his perfect record with my mere 2-2, and also charitable of him to note that my analysis worked out a little better than the picks themselves. Oddly, although the pick was a lot further off, I actually think my take on the Red Wings/Oilers holds up better; I was (justifiably) wrong about Roloson, but otherwise thought the Oilers would stack up pretty well. With the Flames/Ducks, I foresaw more a situation where the Flames would control a couple games territorially but fail to score, not the Ducks’ utter domination of the two elimination games (both of which would have been routs without Kiprusoff); the team that the Optimistic Scott envisioned showed up for maybe 5 periods. And that had to be the ugliest Game 7 performance by a team I can recall since that Avs/Red Wings game where Crawford went postal on Scotty Bowman, and at least that game was on the road. Oh well—this pretty clearly wasn’t a championship team, so it may be good in the long term to make it clear to Sutter that no matter how strong the defense and goaltending are, he needs to put together more than one-sixth of a championship-calibre top 2 lines. The other question is whether the parity in the NHL is almost too much, with the elimination of the top four seeds from the Western Conference; the NHL playoffs are much more interesting than the NBA ones even leaving aside the vast superiority of the sport, but this is almost too interesting.

Enough of my spilit-milk pondering.  On to round two:

San Jose (5) vs. Edmonton (8): Well, one thing we know: Chris Pronger’s Olympic performance was an aberration, and if Pronger’s at his best the Oil can beat anybody. And if you wanted to make a case for Edmonton, I would repeat that the Oilers have impressive speed and depth up front, and San Jose’s defense is pretty suspect. Still, I think this is a good matchup for San Jose, and while I’d be happy to see the Canadian team go to the finals again, the Sharks have to be a very strong favorite to go to the finals this year; they’re definitely the class of the remaining teams, and the elimination of the Red Wings (who had the potential to outscore them) and the Flames (whose goaltending is so good that they could be twice a goal away from winning a series in which they barely showed up otherwise) really helps them. I don’t see how Edmonton can handle San Jose’s formidable one-two punch up the middle (since I thought the Red Wings were highly overrated I’m not as excited by the upset as some other people), and without meaning to be stubborn, I’m still not sold on Roloson. This will be a fun series to watch, much more competitive than the Sharks’ easy dismissal of the Preds, and with one great and one highly underrated hockey city involved as a bonus. But I’m going with the consensus on this one. SHARKS IN 6.

Anaheim (6) vs. Colorado (7): Basically, this series is a near-coin-flip in which the Ducks deserve to be mild favorites, so take this pick as my contrarian sticking up for the Avs. I hope it’s not interpreted as sour grapes; the Ducks were very impressive, and the series was not really as close as being the first round’s only seventh-gamer would indicate. They have the balance of size and speed up front that made people drool over the Stars (enough, apparently, to make those people forget that Marty Turco blows) and as you know—if you’re reading this far—Niedermayer is a marvel. Michael will know better than I whether Joel Quenneville’s xs-and-os can be overmatched in the way that Sutter’s (for all his many other virtues) can, but Carlyle is really good; the Ducks made terrific adjustments, especially on special teams. Still, I think one can construct a solid case that the Avs are, again, going to be underrated. First of all, I think that with Theodore people are focusing too much on this year’s stats rather than on his ability; just two years ago he was universally considered one of the best goalies in the league, and that kind of skill is resilient. Conversely, Giguere is clearly not 100%, and given that he was facing almost no chances Bryzgalov is an unknown. (Can you believe that he was the first star in Game 7 while Niedermayer was snubbed? I know that he got a shutout, but the Ducks could have won that game with a pylon bolted to the goal line.) Also, the Flames were uniquely unable to exploit the Ducks’ biggest weakness: their thinness on defense. Niedermayer could shadow Iginla and dare anybody else to beat them—especially once Sutter made the baffling decision to pair Huselius, his best playmaker, with Yelle and McCarty—but against the Avs multi-layered attack he can’t be everywhere. (And, again, Sakic, Tanguay, Hejduk—that people take them for granted doesn’t mean they’re not great.) Blake, like Pronger, seemed to get a second wind in the playoffs. And playing 7 games against the most physical team in the conference, as the Ducks did, has to extract a toll; I’m guessing that the Ducks are nursing a lot of little injuries (and in the case of Fedoruk and Perry, perhaps more than that.) I think Joe can pull them to the conference finals one more once. AVALANCHE IN 7.

Just so you know to bet the other way, in the east I’ll say Senators in 6 in a series I’m really looking forward to, and Devils in 5.

______________

Thanks, Scott!  I’m with you on the Sharks—I think they’re headed to the Cup finals, myself.  And the Avs-Ducks are indeed a very difficult call.  I would say Ducks in 6 but for three things: one, I think Quenneville is one of the best coaches in the league.  When the Blues were at their best in the late 1990s-early 2000s, they were a disciplined defensive team with a good handful of scorers up front and a pylon in net.  With the exception of the epochal 2000 collapse against the Sharks, Joel Q. had them playing over their heads.  Two, the Avs’ upset of the Stars featured some kinda frightening displays of will.  You don’t score two game-tying, back-breaking goals in the final minutes in consecutive games and proceed to win ‘em both in OT unless you’ve got insanely hungry and talented players who can make it happen.  And Sakic has long been one of my favorite players in the league; he is, after all, the English-speaking reincarnation of Jean Ratelle.  On the other hand, speaking of displays of will, the Ducks’ performance in games six and seven against Calgary was rather hard to read.  The Flames looked abysmal, this is true.  I could only imagine how much Scott was suffering as they managed three weak shots on net in the second period of game seven and never came up with a single decent scoring chance in the final period, either.  But did they suck because they simply sucked, or because the Ducks made them look terrible?  I’m going to say (b), the Ducks decided not to allow them over the red line, and then stuck by that resolve even when the Flames pulled Kiprusoff in their final futile gesture.  And though Bryzgalov wasn’t really tested, save percentages above .960 are hard to dismiss, I think.  So I’m going with Ducks in 7.

Oh, right!  I was supposed to be calling the East.  Sorry about that.

Ottawa (1) v. Buffalo (4).  Aren’t you Sabres fans glad they don’t begin the playoffs in the fall?  In the first three meetings between these teams, back in October-November, the Sens won by scores of 5-0, 10-4, and 6-1.  The Sabres won three of the next five, but . . . oh, let’s just throw out the regular season.  The important question is whether the Scary Senators who scored 8 goals in one game against the Lightning will outskate the Scary Sabres who scored 8 against the Flyers.  I’m not expecting any 9-8 overtime games, exactly, but I am expecting great transition games and dazzling, windburn-level speed.  If you’re wondering why people like me can spend so much of their precious time watching guys chase a puck around, tune into this series.  You won’t be disappointed.  Details: Martin Havlat is back for the Sens, and Jochen Hecht is out for the Sabres.  Hecht’s injury doesn’t sound like a deal-breaker right now, because Buffalo can hurt you with about eight other guys, each of whom—Drury, Briere, Connolly, Dumont, Pominville, Grier, Kotalik, and Afinogenov—scored at least two in the first round.  But on the Senators’ side, Havlat, Heatley, and Spezza each picked up ten points in five games against Tampa Bay, and the Sens are deep on defense (and certainly more fleet of skate than the poor sluggish Flyers), so they may be able to slow Buffalo down through the neutral zone—which they will surely need to do.  The goaltending is anybody’s guess.  Here’s mine.  Ryan Miller was not a factor for the Sabres in the blowouts, obviously; he was thoroughly outplayed by Esche in game one (though the Sabres pulled it out in OT, on their 58th shot of the game) and was merely average in games three and four in Philly.  But Ottawa is still crossing their collective fingers with Emery in net—and it will be Emery.  He’s earned that right, regardless of what happens with Hasek.  I have a funny feeling that my perfect-to-date record will not survive this round, but what the hell.  SENATORS IN 7.

Carolina (2) v. New Jersey (3).  I hate “psychological” explanations of hockey games.  I can’t stand people talking about how the team feels X or is tentative about Y, as if we’re dealing with hive minds rather than individuals who either do or don’t get to loose pucks, either do or don’t pick up their man on the backcheck, and either do or don’t ring blazing shots off the crossbar and in, as Cory Stillman did in the second minute of OT in game six of the Canadiens series.  The game is determined in the last instance by the material base, people, not by the superstructure.  Nevertheless, I’m going to hold my nose and point out that on one side, we have a team that lost its first two at home, the first by an embarrassing 6-1 and the second by means of an emotional ordeal in which they trailed 3-0, scored the next four, gave up two quick ones to fall behind again, then tied the game with a minute left (Stillman again), and then lost in double OT anyway.  After that, any reasonable person would have declared the Canes dead, and as a reasonable person, that’s just what I did.  (There’s also the fact that it’s hard for me to root against the standardbearers of French Canada when they play teams from places where people prefer to watch cars go round and round, but the double-OT thing was more important.) But mirabile visu, the Canes climbed out of the coffin like unto Uma Thurman in Kill Bill Volume Two, and won four consecutive one-goal games—three of them on the road, two of those in OT.  On the other side, uh, well, lessee, the Devils have now won 135 straight, or something like that.  Fifteen, at least.  They weren’t tested against the Rangers, so in game one we’ll have to see whether Newly Resilient and Battle-Tested Team has more momentum (ew!  there, I said “momentum!” I feel so icky now) than Team That Hasn’t Lost Since March 26.  Devils Details: I didn’t mention Patrik Elias in round one.  That was a mistake.  He now leads all scorers in the playoffs despite having played only four games.  If Elias turns in another series like that one, the Canes are in trouble.  I still want to think that at some point, the Devils will realize that they have fifty percent fewer Scotts than they did back in ‘01 and ‘03: the unbeatable Scott Stevens has retired, don’t you know, and the brilliant Scott Niedermayer is a Mighty Duck (see above), which leaves them only with sniper Scott Gomez and backup- G- who- for- obvious- reasons- will- never- leave- the- bench Scott Clemmensen.  And when they realize the full measure of their Scottlessness, the Devils will suddenly think to themselves that they’ve gotten too deep into the playoffs, and they will start to drown.  But then Marty Brodeur will hold them aloft, because he is extremely strong and can carry the entire team all the way from New Jersey to the Cup finals if need be.  Whereas the Canes have to be hoping, just hoping, that Cam Ward is the real deal.  He was terrific against the Habs, but as you know if you’ve been reading this far, any goaltender can lease his soul to Satan for a two-week period.  So, then: this is a painful one.  I like many of the players on the Hurricanes, and I have a special place in my heart for guys like Stillman who continually play as if they are more talented than they actually are.  I think the Canes know how to play 6-5 games as well as 2-1 games (as I said two weeks ago), whereas the Devils don’t like to count that high.  And all the intangibles seem to point to Carolina.  But screw intangibles!  This blog hates intangibles as much as it hates team psychologizin’.  The Devils will get to loose pucks and pick up guys on the backcheck and ring shots off the crossbar, and when they don’t, Brodeur will hoist them onto his immeasurably broad shoulders. DEVILS IN 7.

SABRES-SENATORS UPDATE, 11 pm Friday:  Damn!  When I typed “I’m not expecting any 9-8 overtime games, exactly, but I am expecting great transition games and dazzling, windburn-level speed,” I actually meant to say, “I’m not expecting any 9-8 overtime games, exactly, but I am expecting great transition games and dazzling, windburn-level speed, and I wouldn’t be surprised to see a 7-6 overtime game in which both teams combine for three goals in the final two minutes of regulation play.” What a game!  As we forwards like to say, the best offense . . . is a really good offense!

Posted by Michael on 05/05 at 12:03 PM
(15) Comments • (1) Trackbacks • Permalink
Page 1 of 1 pages