Monthly Archives: May 2008

Report: Canadian NHL Teams create 31 per cent of league’s ticket revenue.

A secret NHL report made public by Rick Westhead at the Toronto Star show that 31 per cent of the National Hockey League’s $1.1 billion (U.S.) in league ticket revenue, has come from the six teams based in Canada. 

According to the report that has not been made public by the NHL (as of Friday morning, May 30), “the league has seen its ticket revenue rise almost 10 per cent, but 11 of the 24 U.S.-based clubs were either revenue-flat or lost ticket income.”

Not surprisingly, the Toronto Maple Leafs finished first on the list at $1.9 million in ticket revenue per game. The Montreal Canadiens were second. Based on 41 home games, the Leafs collected $77.9 million in ticket revenue last year and that doesn’t count the revenue from pre-season games. 

Now, to be fair, Westhead suggested the increase in the value of the Canadian dollar may be responsible for as much as half of the league’s revenue gains since the NHL went through the lockout of 2004-05, but that doesn’t explain why six little Canadian-based teams create more than 30 per cent of the revenue.

What that suggests is that Gary Bettman’s foray into South Florida, Tampa, Nashville, Atlanta and Phoenix (not to mention the existing messes in Chicago, Long Island and Washington) has been an unmitigated financial disaster.

“This really makes the case for another team in Canada, whether it’s Hamilton, Winnipeg or Quebec City,” former Vancouver Canucks owner Arthur Griffiths told Westhead.

The most interesting item in the league’s report concerns the embarrassing Phoenix Coyotes. The Coyotes, who have been a financial and, yes, popular disaster in the U.S. desert since they moved from Winnipeg in 1996, were last in ticket revenue at $450,000. That’s a disgrace to the sport and suggests that commissioner Gary Bettman’s decision to allow the Jets to move to the American desert was a massive error in judgment. In the Jets final lame-duck year in 1996, the team earned about $330,000 per game in ticket revenues. That was the lowest in the final five years of the team’s existence. Twelve years later, Phoenix is only $120,000 a game higher. My good gawd…

The Coyotes are now, officially, losing more than $30 million a season (according to the Arizona Republic) and have lost as much as $600 million since leaving Winnipeg. 

According to the report, obtained by rivercitysportsblog.com on Friday morning, in 2007-08, eight U.S. teams – the Coyotes, the Atlanta Thrashers, the Florida Panthers, the New York Islanders, the Chicago Blackhawks, the Washington Capitals, the Nashville Predators and the St. Louis Blues – generated less than half the amount of ticket revenue of the Edmonton Oilers and Ottawa Senators. At $1.2 million in ticket revenue per game, the Oilers and Senators earned the least amount of ticket money among the six Canadian franchises.

This report obviously opens up the debate about bringing an NHL team back to Winnipeg.

Granted, Winnipeg has a population of only 700,000. Granted, Winnipeg lags behind other cities in weekly earnings. Granted, our corporate financial marketing base is very small. And granted, our downtown arena is tiny, with no parking revenue, many uncomfortable seats and too few luxury suites. 

However, there is little question that after 12 years, fans are dying to have the NHL return. The mere fact that my book, “The Winnipeg Jets: A Celebration of Professional Hockey in Winnipeg,” sold out 7,000 copies in Manitoba alone, is a clear indication that the Jets mattered, still do and that their return would still draw large crowds. Hey, if I were Bettman, I’d put a team in Central Ontario tomorrow. Then I’d look at Winnipeg and Quebec City.

It has been suggested that the money is already in place in order for Winnipeg to acquire a franchise. I don’t know if that’s true or not, but I do know this: No matter what happens in terms of the future of the NHL, Winnipeg will ALWAYS be a better market for big-time hockey than the southern United States.

Period. End of discussion.

Penguins alive. Game 3: Pittsburgh 3 Detroit 2.

That’s why we watch hockey. That’s what those folks who don’t love the game miss when they choose to watch the Pistons and Celtics play the American version of European Team Handball. (How many steps is Kevin Garnett allowed going to the basket? Eight?)

 

But who really cares about basketball? Nothing on earth is better than great hockey. Up and down. Big hits. Tape-to-tape passes. Outstanding chances. Terrific goaltending (at least, at one end).

 

Oh yeah, and how about the superstar factor? Sidney Crosby scores the first two goals of the game. Nice. 

 

When the final score in a game in the Stanley Cup final is 3-2, it’s hard to find fault. Although if Detroit fans want to blame somebody, they could probably get away with blaming Chris Osgood.

 

The winning goal was a deflection from behind the net off Osgood’s back by Adam Hall, a guy who wouldn’t be considered a big goal scorer. At the other end, Marc-Andre Fleury showed us why he’s now 9-0 in the playoffs at Mellon Arena.

 

The only criticism I had of the entire evening was the chicken-livered penalty calls early in the game. It’s silly, you know. In the first two periods, players can hardly breathe on each other. There were seven penalty calls in the first two periods and one in the third. The early penalties were all cheap. In the third period, everything — including hitting from behind — became legal. No wonder Americans don’t understand the rules and no wonder it’s difficult to grow new fans. If you actually try to understand the rules of this game you’ll never get it. Canadians who have lived with it all their lives know the entire sport is completely different in the third period of a playoff game.

 

Thank the lord for that.

 

The final period last night was spectacular and while Don Cherry really wanted to make Gary Roberts the hero, ol’ Don wasn’t even close. The hero was Fleury.

 

Detroit outshot Pittsburgh 34-24 and, by my count, outchanced the Pens 26-6. The Wings also outhit Pittsburgh 34-31 — only two Wings didn’t register a hit. 

 

Let’s not lie, here. The Red Wings dominated this game in every aspect but one. That’s right. Fleury was much better than Osgood. 

 

But hey, the goalie is part of the team and in hockey, a goalie can win you a championship. Detroit’s skaters might have been better, but Marc-Andre Fleury was spectacular and while it’s unlikely Pittsburgh will win three of the next four games, it’s not impossible.

 

A great goalie can pull it off and this Saturday night, Marc-Andre Fleury gets another chance. 

 

One can only hope Saturday’s Game4 will be as good as Wednesday’s Game 3. 

Ongoing Perfection. Game 2: Detroit 3 Pittsburgh 0.

Hard to imagine the Detroit Red Wings could be better in Game 2 of the 2008 Stanley Cup final than they were in Game 1, but it seems that just when you think you have the Wings figured out, they shift into another gear.

 

Monday night at Joe Louis Arena, the Wings made the Pittsburgh Penguins look as silly as, ohh, penguins.

 

In fact, Pittsburgh was so out of this one that even though they managed to get more shots on net in Game 2 than they did in Game 1, most of the shots were unscreened dump-ins from the blueline.

 

Meanwhile, Detroit plays the game the way Minnesota Wild assistant general manager Tom Thompson always wanted his hockey team to play.

 

“It’s like the difference between European hockey and Canadian hockey in the 70s,” Thompson once said. “In Canada, we always wanted to shoot the puck into the opposing zone. Our theory was, if it’s in your zone, you can’t score. In Russia, their theory was, it doesn’t matter what zone it’s in, if we have the puck you can’t score. That’s the way Detroit plays. They always have the puck.” 

 

Last night, playing that frustrating puck-possession style, the Red Wings took 34 shots at Marc-Andre Fleury while holding Pittsburgh to 22, mostly weak ones. There were times when Chris Osgood must have thought he was sitting on his porch having a lemonade as he watched the traffic go by. 

 

Ozzie now has two straight shutouts to start this year’s final. That’s only happened on three other occasions — Clint Benedict of the Montreal Maroons in 1926, Frank McCool of the Leafs in 1945 and Martin Brodeur of the Devils in 2003. That’s pretty good company.

 

Of course, to give credit where it’s due, the Red Wings shutout heroics start with a defence that has been all but impenetrable. Nicklas Lidstrom, Brad Stuart, Brian Rafalski and Niklas Kronwall have been particularly good and the relentless checking of Henrik Zetterberg, Pavel Datsyuk, Tomas Holmstrom, Kris Draper, Dan Cleary and Johan Franzen has certainly given the Wings control of the neutral zone.

 

Meanwhile, the Penguins have spent more time marching to the penalty box than they have toward the Red Wings net. This March of the Penguins is not what Pittsburgh fans had in mind.

 

Of course, Pittsburgh fans probably thought Evgeni Malkin was going to show up (he was minus-2 with no shots on goal last night).

 

If the Penguins didn’t have Sidney Crosby, the outcome would be worse than a 2-0 deficit, two straight shutout losses and two straight embarrassments.   

 

Game 3 is Wednesday night in Pittsburgh. The Pens will have to win one of the next two to force a return to Detroit. They should get at least a split at home.

But then again, based on the first two games of this series, there is no guarantee. 

 

The Perfect Game? Game 1: Detroit 4 Pittsburgh 0.

Can you play a perfect hockey game? That’s pretty tough to say and, probably, even tougher to  imagine.

 

Hockey is so much different than most sports with its speed, its puck movement, the ebb and flow of each line change. Goaltending, power plays, bad passes, dumb passes, great passes, giveaways, takeaways, missed assignments, blocked shots, all the things that can make or break a team — or even both teams — tend to make hockey the most imperfect game.

 

Ever sat around watching a hockey game and counted the “completed” passes? If you have and you ever got past three, it was probably on a power-play.

 

That’s why, what happened on Saturday night at Joe Louis Arena, was really something to watch. The Detroit Red Wings probably got as close to perfect as a team can get.

 

They outshot the Penguins 36-19. Outhit them 31-25. Outscored them 4-0. In a nutshell, the Red Wings completely dominated Game 1 of the 2008 Stanley Cup final.

 

Kris Draper was in Sidney Crosby’s face all night and while Crosby often escaped and played brilliantly, he got only three shots at Chris Osgood and was never a real threat to score.

 

Meanwhile, Evgeni Malkin was AWOL. Marian Hossa had four shots on net and two misses (almost all of those chances were set up by Crosby), while Hal Gill, a guy that four of our local media geniuses — on TV, no less — said was playing “really well,” (puh-leese) was on the ice for three of Detroit’s four goals and finished at minus-2. 

 

Offensively for Detroit, two goals by Mikael Samuelsson, pretty much put this one away, but sensational goals by Daniel Cleary and Henrik Zetterberg, in the dying moments, put an exclamation point on the opener.

 

Detroit was better in all aspects of the game. If it’s possible to play a perfect hockey game, the Red Wings played a perfect hockey game on Saturday night.  

 

Game 2 goes Monday. Maybe it’ll be Pittsburgh’s turn.   

 

 

Why I like Pittsburgh’s chances, even though I’ve picked Detroit to win the 2008 Stanley Cup final.

For our regular readers, let me make myself perfectly clear. I’m picking the Detroit Red Wings to win the NHL’s Stanley Cup final in six games.

 

However, I do believe there are ways for the Penguins to win the series. That’s because, while I like Detroit (at least if I’m asked, I’ll say I like Detroit), I think Pittsburgh is good enough to challenge and perhaps even win. In fact, this will be the best Stanley Cup final in decades.

 

Here’s how Pittsburgh wins the Stanley Cup…

 

(1) Uses it’s advantage. If you check the old fashioned tale of the tape, Pittsburgh is younger and bigger. According to the NHL Guide and Record Book, among those players who have appeared in at least one playoff game this spring, the Detroit Red Wings’ average age is 32.3-years-old, nearly five years older than the Penguins’ average age of 27.9 years. The Penguins measure in at nearly 6’2″ and 208 pounds; the Red Wings average just under 6’0″ and 195 lbs. That could have a bearing on the outcome.

 

(2) Chris Osgood. Detroit’s “newish” No. 1 goalie is better than Dominik Hasek and he’s played pretty well, but he’s still not the goalie Marc-Andre Fleury has proven to be in these playoffs. It was a much wiser man than me who said: “We call it the Stanley Cup final because we can’t call it goalie.” The better goalie will win this series and that could easily be Fleury.

 

(3) The defence steps up. If Pittsburgh has a weakness, it’s on defence, but they’ve been good so far. No reason for them to continue.

 

(4) Sidney Crosby needs to be a better leader than the handful of leaders Detroit possesses. Nick Lidstrom, Kris Draper, Chris Chelios, Darren McCarty… they’ve all been around the bend and they have all those rings. Sid the Kid needs to be even better.

 

(5) The 1-2-2 defensive system has to shut down the likes of Henrik Zetterberg, Tomas Holmstrom, Pavel Datsyuk, Jiri Hudler and a defence that moves the puck very quickly. This will be a different assignment than the Pens faced against Philly.

 

(6) Get more chances and score more goals. Sounds simple, but this time it’s true. Detroit won’t waste its sweat equity running the Penguins the way Philadelphia did. The Red Wings are a smarter team with more finesse. Despite Pittsburgh’s vaunted, much-publicized, defensive “system,” this series will be about offence.

 

(7) Outwork the Wings. Again, it sounds simple, but it’s not easy. Granted, if the Wings get ahead, say, 3-0 or 4-1, they often take their foot off the gas. But why wait? Pittsburgh needs to get ahead 3-0 — not fall behind 3-0 and hope Detroit kicks back — and they can do it by outworking a team that hasn’t been outworked yet.

 

The fact Pittsburgh is bigger and younger and that, so far at least, their goaltending has been better, means the Penguins have a great chance to win this series. 

 

But I still believe it’s Detroit’s time and will stick with my original prediction — Detroit in six games.

 

Why I like the Red Wings to win the 2008 Stanley Cup final

ChrisChelios Why I like the Red Wings to win the 2008 Stanley Cup finalThere is little doubt that most Canadian hockey fans — and perhaps just plain old hockey fans in general — have fallen in love with the Pittsburgh Penguins. Most polls out there would suggest that the majority of fans in this country will be cheering wildly for the Pens, although not necessarily booing Detroit at the same time.

 

It’s pretty hard not to like the Wings, and most fans know that they’re in for a great Stanley Cup final regardless of which team wins. While most fans are cheering for the younger, although only equally as exciting Penguins, I continue to have a problem picking Pittsburgh to win the series.

 

In fact, I look at Pittsburgh as the 1983 Edmonton Oilers. Oh, man, they were good, but they just weren’t quite ready to unseat the New York Islanders as masters of hockey’s domain. The Isles beat the Oil in ’83, but Edmonton came back to create a dynasty of its own starting in 1984.

 

The Penguins have a chance to be a hockey dynasty. But not just yet.

 

Here’s why I like the Red Wings…

 

(1) They have 11 guys who have won the Cup before and in total, they have 24 rings in their locker room.

 

(2) The Wings are the President’s Trophy winners which means they’ve been at the top of their game for an entire season and for three rounds of the playoffs. Just like the Oilers in 1983, a team that went 11-1 through the first three rounds of the playoffs, Pittsburgh has played only 14 games (12-2) to reach the final. Trouble was, the Oilers lost that final in ’83 and so, too, will the Pens in ’08. 

 

(3) The Wings are considerably better — not just a little better but considerably better — than the three teams Pittsburgh beat to reach the final.

 

(4) Defensively, Detroit is the only team with the ability to shut down Pittsburgh’s high-powered offence. Nicklas Lidstrom, Brad Stuart, Nicklas Kronwall and Brian Rafalski can shut down Pittsburgh’s two potent top lines.

 

(5) Detroit can score. Sure, the Pens have Sidney Crosby and Evgeni Malkin and Marian Hossa, but Detroit has Henrik Zetterberg, Pavel Datsyuk, Tomas Holmstrom and Johan Franzen (if he’s healthy). The two teams match up nicely, but Pittsburgh’s defensive units will have their hands full with the Detroit forwards.

 

(6) Detroit has home ice advantage and they don’t lose at home very often. 

 

(7) The Wings are in the final for the fifth time in 13 years. They have more experience (46-year-old Chris Chelios has two Cups and virtually a lifetime of experience) and more poise. Not to mention all those rings.

 

OK, so I worry about Chris Osgood and I wonder if the Detroit power-play is as good as the Pittsburgh power-play, but that’s all I worry about.

 

Pittsburgh will start reeling off a few Cups — next year. This year, the Red Wings win in six.

The best of the best on display. The 2008 Stanley Cup final.

Finally. After a couple of days of annoyance, the Detroit Red Wings finally disposed of the upstart Dallas Stars and will now meet the Pittsburgh Penguins in the Stanley Cup final.

 

Monday night in Dallas, the Red Wings blasted the Stars 4-1 as former Winnipeg Jet, Dallas Drake, had a goal and an assist. Detroit took out the Stars in six games and now the Stanley Cup final will begin this Saturday night at Joe Louis Arena (all games are in the evening and all games will be on CBC).

 

For a Winnipegger, the Wings-Dallas series was kind of eerie. Back in 1996, the Jets played the Red Wings in what turned out to be Jets’ final playoff series in the NHL.

 

In Game 5 of that year, the Jets went into Detroit trailing three-games-to-one and goaltender Nikolai Khabibulin stood on his head to send the series back to Winnipeg for Game 6. In Game 6, Detroit shredded the Jets, beat them 4-1 and ended the series — and the Jets NHL tenure — in six games.  

 

So what happens in 2008? Trailing 3-1, Marty Turco goes back into Detroit, stands on his head and forces a Game 6. In Game 6, Detroit shreds the Stars, wins 4-1 and closes out the series in six games. And 39-year-old Dallas Drake, who was on the ice for the Jets in 1996, scores a goal and adds an assist for the Red Wings.

 

Oh, what could have been (if Gary Filmon’s P.C. government of the day had a collective brain bigger than a walnut).

 

As it is, there is something special on the horizon. 

 

Granted, it took a bit longer than we anticipated, but the Stanley Cup final is perfect. Wings-Penguins is just as it should be.

These are the two best teams in hockey. The Red Wings are the President’s Trophy winners and the Penguins have required only 14 games to go three rounds in the playoffs in order to reach the final. This is Crosby, Malkin, Staal, Gonchar and Hossa against Zetterberg, Datsyuk, Holmstrom, Lidstrom and, hopefully, Franzen. This is hockey.

We’ll talk more about these two teams this week. The final doesn’t start until Saturday. But make no mistake, this is the best final fans could have anticipated. In fact, it just might be the best final in decades.

 

Pens make statement in Game 5 win over Flyers. Game 5: Pittsburgh 6, Philadelphia 0.

In Canada, there seems to be growing affection for the Pittsburgh Penguins, all the way from the Rock to the Island.

 

Fans say they love Pittsburgh’s speed, its skill, its ability to score and the attack method that it uses all over the ice. They say they love Sid the Kid and “that Fleury guy in goal,” and they really like the fact that the Pens think offence before defence. 

 

No doubt, the Penguins are fun to watch and on Sunday they proved they are pretty damn good, too.

 

The Pens eliminated the Philadelphia Flyers in five games in the Eastern Conference final after recording an impressive 6-0 victory at old Mellon Arena in Pittsburgh.

 

Ryan Malone led the way with two goals and an assist, Marian Hossa had a goal and three assists, Evgeni Malkin and Jordan Staal each scored once and Sidney Crosby dished out two assists. Meanwhile, goaltender Marc-Andre Fleury had to make only 21 saves to get the shutout. Fleury, by the way, is 22-4-1 since late November.

 

The Penguins outshot Philly 25-21 and controlled the pace of the game as Pittsburgh moved on to the Stanley Cup final for the first time since last winning the Stanley Cup in 1992. The Penguins won the Cup in both 1991 and 1992 (Winnipeg Metis star, Jamie Leach, played on both of those teams) and this year, reached the final by losing only two games along the way (12-2). The Pens are 10-0 in the playoffs this year when they score first.

 

I had an opportunity this past week to talk to ex-Flyer sniper — and the offensive heart of the old Broad Street Bullies — Reggie (The Riverton Rifle) Leach, about his old team. He wasn’t very impressed.

 

These days, Reggie spends his summers in Delaware running his landscaping business and his winters on Little Current First Nation in Ontario where he’s the player personnel director and head coach of the Northern Ontario Hockey League’s Manitoulin Islanders. But he always watches his Flyers — even though it’s starting to sound as if he’s adopted a new team. 

 

He had this to say about the Penguins-Flyers series: “Man, I’m still a Flyer at heart, but it was hard watching them in the Eastern final.

 

“I just don’t think they played up to par. Pittsburgh has so many weapons that when one guy doesn’t show up, they have all sorts of other guys who pick up the slack. Because Pittsburgh is as big and tough as they are, Philadelphia’s big, tough guys might just as well have stayed home.”

 

Because of his coaching job, Leach admits that he now watches NHL games like an NHL coach. He’s always checking out systems, both defenisve and offensive, and he believes Pittsburgh has the best.

 

“This is the first time in a lot of years that I’ve watched every game and it’s because I’m coaching again,” The Rifle said. “I love the Flyers, but what I’ve noticed is that Pittsburgh plays with every guy. Philadelphia is relying on 10 guys and you can’t do that. You need everybody.

 

“Pittsburgh really moves the puck and attacks all the time. And Philly can’t blame their goaltenders. The goalies have been great. But Pittsburgh just has too much offence and they use all their tools. I love the way they play and I think they have a chance to go a long, long way.”

 

So, too, Reg, do your colleagues and a growing number of Canadian hockey fans.

 

Fact is, if the Red Wings don’t get it together soon, the Pens might just get to hockey’s Holy Grail without cracking a sweat.

 

Will officiating ever change? Or do we need video replay for everything?

I’m a video replay proponent. After a life of playing, watching, coaching, writing, broadcasting and complaining about sports, I have come to the conclusion that there isn’t anyone, anywhere, who can officiate any sporting event properly, at any time. 

 

Can’t be done.

 

There are no good officials. They are all bad. It’s just that some are worse than others. When an official once asked me during a basketball game (he was pissed off, by the way), “What do you want? For all of us to go home so you’re left calling your own fouls?” My response was swift and to the point. “Yes. Save us all a lot of aggravation and get your ass out of here.”

 

Sadly, he wouldn’t leave.

 

Even in this world of performance-enhancing pharmaceuticals, I still believe most athletes are invariably honest while most officials either don’t have a clue or are just plain crooked. If you left it up to the athletes, they could could call the games themselves and be (a) a lot more accurate and (b) a lot more honest.

 

Case in point, Wednesday night in Dallas.

 

There was Red Wings’ agitator, Tomas Holmstrom, stationed where he always is, right in front of a goaltender, when Pavel Datsyuk ripped a shot past Marty Turco. It was clearly a goal, 1-0 Detroit.

 

But that’s when Kelly Sutherland decided that it was a good time to wave it off and say Holmstrom was in the crease.

 

There were blind people who saw it differently, but Sutherland stuck to his guns. It was, clearly, one of the worst calls in playoff history, but he was sticking to it. Of course, he could. You can’t use replay on an “in the crease” call.

 

Oh, how convenient. This call is based completely on a referee’s discretion. Period. 

 

Interestingly, later in the game, there was little doubt Loui Eriksson was in the crease when Stephane Robidas shot the puck at Chris Osgood and Eriksson just changed places in the crease to pop in the rebound. This time, Sutherland let it go. In the old days of makeup calls, Sutherland would have disallowed both but in today’s NHL, two wrongs don’t make a right but a dozen or so, do.

 

“Kelly’s a good referee, he just blew the call. That’s life,” Wings coach Mike Babcock told the assembled media during the post-game news conference. “But make no mistake, these officials meet before games and talk about players. The fact it was Holmstrom near the crease meant at least one goal would be disallowed.”

 

I’m not going to jump to conclusions and say the fix was in. Frankly, I don’t care. But to say Sutherland allowed a pre-game meeting to get in the way of his good judgment is probably true. After all, Sutherland was as close as he could possibly be to Holmstrom without getting hit by Datsyuk’s shot. It was such an egregiously bad call that it shed a nasty light on the entire NHL. Can anyone say WWE?

 

There is now little question that “in the crease” calls need to be reviewed. If this one had been reviewed, it would have counted and Sutherland wouldn’t have looked like (a) an idiot, (b) Blind Pugh or (c) a fixer.

 

Fortunately, Sutherland’s call affected the outcome of only one game, not an entire series. The Wings should close this thing out on Saturday, anyway.

 

However, in such times as these calls become important (like overtime in Buffalo in 1999), it would be best if the NHL let replay — or better stated, the truth — decide the outcome. 

 

Obviously when a bunch of guys in striped shirts — oh yes, guys who try to do the best they can — try to do it alone, it just doesn’t work.

 

According to form III. Game 3: Detroit 5, Dallas 2; Pittsburgh 4 Philadelphia 1.

Hey folks, getting excited about a Detroit-Pittsburgh Stanley Cup final? 

 

We’re on the verge… 

 

Tuesday night in Philadelphia, the Penguins got two goals from Marian Hossa and a couple of assists from the brilliant Sidney Crosby (and he WAS brilliant) en route to a 4-1 blistering of the Flyers. With the win, the Penguins take a 3-0 lead in the Eastern Conference final. Game 4 goes Thursday in Philadelphia, but it’s merely a formality. The Flyers can mail it in.

 

Of course, when you’re outshot 25-18 in your own building in a Game 3 you absolutely, positively have to win, you’re already mailing it in.

 

Based on what we watched on Tuesday, it would appear the Penguins are just as dominating as the Wings and that means this spring’s Stanley Cup final might be the best in years. Detroit’s complete destruction of an undermanned Dallas Stars team has been a thing of beauty. Tuesday night, however, Pittsburgh’s 4-1 win over Philly was just as impressive as Detroit’s 5-2 shellacking of Dallas on Monday. 

Right now, both Detroit and Pittsburgh lead their respective conference championships 3-0 and, yes, both teams have been as spectacular as 3-0 series leads would indicate.

Both teams are big, both teams can score, both teams have skill and both teams favour offence over defence, so we could soon be treated to one of the greatest Stanley Cup finals in history. Hopefully, Dallas and Philadelphia will just curl up into the fetal position and we can end these listless Conference finals. 

On Monday, I was talking to my old pal Theoren Fleury, who is doing extremely well as a Calgary entrepreneur these days, and he told me that he doesn’t watch a lot of hockey, but when he does, he watches the Penguins.

“I love the Penguins because they don’t play any defence,” Fleury said. “It’s go, go, go. Outscore the opposition. It looks like they’re actually having fun.

 

“I mean, listen, I have 100,000 hours of video tape of me playing for Dave King and Pierre Page and you know what they stressed. Well, guess what? We never won. It doesn’t work. That boring, defensive, trapping style is bad for the game and unless you have 20 guys with no hockey skill who will buy into that system, you don’t have a chance. Whoever won playing that style? Tell me. Even when it was popular, Detroit and Dallas and Tampa, with all those scorers, won. 

 

“That’s why I like Pittsburgh. They play to outscore their opponent. That’s hockey.”

 

It’s the way Detroit plays, too. And that’s why I can’t wait for the mere formalities that are these Conference finals to come to a quick, merciful end.