Why are so many former targets working as talking heads on hockey broadcasts? I'm a former, not nearly as accomplished, target. We know bugger all about forwards, defencemen, systems, shooting or coaching strategies. The only thing we're good at is explaining why a goal wasn't our fault. Maybe that's it. Former goalies explain the play from a fairly lay perspective. This is also why they are terrible colour analysts. There isn't any analysis. They just repeat what the play-by-play guy said in a different way. It's fucking distracting. Most broadcast teams have a play-by-play person and de facto play-by-play person who won't shut up and let the game breathe. And old timey goalies don't keep up on contemporary goaltending technique, like the importance of post play. Goaltending techniques are significantly advanced from the days when goalies only needed two things: courage, and a good pain tolerance. Read a little InGoal magazine and add something of interest to the broadcast. (To be fair, McLennan and Biron are pretty good on panels. Otherwise, not a great group of broadcasters).
I don't watch Niemi that closely. But he loses his net a lot. He was at least six inches too far to his left on Toffoli's goal. Maybe he was having a bad night (obviously), but these aren't mistakes I see often from NHL starters. Suddenly the Kings look like the team everyone feared to face in the first round. Can they make the full 0-3 comeback? I doubt it. But the Sharks must feel a little historical weight pressing on them now.
Ridiculous pass from MacKinnon on the Av's tying goal. Prepare yourselves for hyperbole about the lad for a couple more days. Although that pass was insane. No exaggeration needed.
It was strange how Gustavsson's pad rolled on Lucic's goal. I don't know if that was a small equipment malfunction, or if his pads are laced in an unorthodox way. It is really difficult to make a modern pad behave like that. They are designed to automatically roll to an edge and give a proper butterfly position. Thankfully the Red Wings are gone. No more talk of the genius of their coach, or organizational structure. These things are true but I get tired of the same stories over and over. I get that the media needs to tell similar stories, because language is too complex to understand without pre-determined frames. But do we have to tell the 'same' stories? It's getting to the point of fucking cliche.
The Pens looked good. So did Fleury. I hope he has a nice run. We love the stories of redemption too. I think the hockey world would embrace a story of fighting to overcome these early mistakes. Although that team still panics around their net. I don't know if it is a nervousness that starts from Fleury, but they lose all their defensive assignments when there is a loose puck. That can't happen if you expect to win the Cup again.
We're marching towards the second round, when things become more pressurized and less interesting. I don't know if it is the rush of so many games that makes the first round the best. I don't know if it is the stark difference in intensity that we are used to by round two. I just know the first round is the best two weeks in sports for me.
No comments:
Post a Comment