Bulldogs shine while Huskies sputter in 5-1 Xcel romp
It was called the Minnesota College Hockey Showcase, so both the Minnesota-Duluth Bulldogs and St. Cloud State Huskies put evidence of how they started the season on display when their half of the doubleheader went to the Dawgs, so to speak. UMD kept up its dramatically improved scoring, while St. Cloud State seemed to find the Yo-yo technique known as the “Sleeper,†as the Bulldogs claimed a 5-1 victory.
It seems like only a year ago when the Bulldogs couldn’t score goals. In fact, it WAS only a year ago. Only once, last season, did UMD score as many as five goals in a game, and after that 5-3 nonconference victory over Bemidji State, the Dawgs scored only 29 goals in their remaining 19 games – an average of 1.05 goals per game, during which time they were shut out five times, and scored only one goal on six other occasions.
For the whole 13-17-6 season, UMD was blanked six times and scored one goal on 10 other occasions. Fortunately for the Bulldogs, they won one game 1-0, and tied two others 1-1.
UMD had another one of those 1-1 ties at Alaska-Anchorage in the second game of their weekend series before to the Showcase, but in the four games prior to the Anchorage tie, the Bulldogs had scored five goals twice and six once — 19 goals in four games. After losing 4-3 and tying 1-1 at Anchorage, they regained their scoring touch with their five-spot against St. Cloud State., meaning they have scored five or more on four occasions in their first seven games this season.
“It was frustrating last year,†acknowledged Nick Kemp, who scored the second UMD goal against St. Cloud. “But we decided we weren’t going to worry about what happened last year. It’s always fun to play at home, but it was great playing here. We wanted to outscore themn on the power play.Ââ€
UMD has been getting goals from an assortment of players, as well. Matt Greer got his first of the season by rapping in a rebound for a 1-0 first-period lead against the Huskies. “The first goal was very important,†said Greer. “We’ve been working on our power play and penalty kill, and it was good to see us come through on both.Ââ€
Kemp got his second with a one-timer off MacGregor Sharp’s pass from deep on the right side to open the second, then Josh Meyers moved in from the point to score a power play goal, and freshman Mike Connolly got his third goal on another power play for a 4-0 lead through two periods.
UMD outshot St. Cloud State 45-31, but the Huskies, who normally have one of the WCHA’s top power plays, were clearly out of sorts, and it wasn’t until 7:11 of the third period before Nick Oslund scored the Huskies goal. At that, UMDF countered almost immediately, when Drew Akins put in his second try with a power-play rebound.
UMD was 3-7 on the power play, while blanking the Huskies 0-6.
“Obviously, with three power-play goals tonight, we capitalized,†said UMD coach Scott Sandelin. “With the rules changes, and the way they’re calling penalties, special teams are huge. Their power play is always one of the top in the league, and with Garrett Roe and Ryan Lasch always making plays, our penalty kill had to come through.”
As for the tournament, Sandelin said, “I think this Showcase is a great event, from a pure college hockey standpoint. It’s a great experience to play one game here. It’s unique, and our players were all excited to get down here and play. As for incentive to get back here to the Final Five? It was brought up.Ââ€
{IMG2}
If the Bulldogs have found goal-scoring with their teams maturing process, St. Cloud coach Bob Motzko was frustrated by his Huskies.
“It’s not a happy coaches camp right now,†said Motzko. “We’re like a Yo-Yo the way we’ve been up and down, and we were at the bottom today. We started the game extremely well, but we let frustration get to us. We have some individuals making some bad decisions, and we’re not a coherent group right now. We’re having big peaks and valleys.Ââ€
The power play’s lack of production is part of the battle. Motzko wasn’t going to name names, naturally, when he talked about sub-par performances, but he praised his young players for their effort, and said the team is getting outstanding leadership from Garrett Raboin and David Carlisle.
“It’s on the ice,†said Motzko. “Our power play is part of it, but we have enough talent that we shouldn’t be letting our frustration get the best of us. We’ve been so emotional every shift that we turn the puck over and take dumb penalties. If we’re going to get beat 5-1, I wish we’d get our tails kicked, but we didn’t. We’ve got to solve that Yo-Yo.Ââ€
Nick Oslund, who got the Huskies goal, corroborated his coach’s views. “We came out and played fine at first,†he said. “But in the second period, the game kind of went away.Ââ€
Oslund summed up his teammates’ view of the Showcase format as a highlight for the weekend. The Huskies will play the second game of the series at UMD on Nov. 29. But the idea of bringing the four Minnesota-based WCHA teams together for league-counting games at Xcel Center could grow into a prominent highlight, the players said.
“It’s definitely a good idea,Ââ€Oslund said. “There’s a lot of pride in Minnesota hockey, and the Showcase is definitely a good thing.Ââ€
Gopher women sweep UMD off No. 1 pedestal
When Minnesota and Minnesota-Duluth meet in women’s hockey, high-intensity and emotional play and outstanding individual achievements are anticipated, to say nothing of some significance on the season’s standings. But there’s also room for surprises, and the rebuilt Golden Gophers proved it once again when they journeyed up Interstate 35 for the opening weekend of Women’s-WCHA.
The Gophers were patient as the nation’s No.1 rated University of Minnesota in Duluth held a ceremony to raise its NCAA championship banner to the rafters of the Duluth Entertainment Convention Center (DECC) on Friday night.
That wasn’t unique, because, after all, it was the fourth time in the eight-year history of NCAA women’s hockey tournaments that the Bulldogs have won the banner.
Nor was it shocking that the Gophers survived a typically high-intensity battle to win the first game 4-3 on Melanie Gagnon’s overtime goal. After all, UMD lost only four games last season while winning the WCHA championship, and Minnesota had inflicted three of them.
What was truly startling was that Minnesota’s refuvenated Gophers came back just as hungry in Saturday’s second game and simply outhustled the Bulldogs throughout to claim a 2-0 shutout for sophomore goaltender Jenny Lura.
UMD appeared loaded enough to deserve its No. 1 rating, and had done little to dissuade anyone with an opening 6-2, 6-1 sweep on the road at Niagara. Minnesota, meanwhile, had lost 3-2 in overtime to a U.S. Women’s National team that had been reduced to 10 skaters, and the U.S. also won 2-1 in a shootout that night to demonstrate the new rule. Then the Gophers opened against a supposed soft touch in Robert Morris, but were upset 3-2 in the opener, despite a 65-shot barrage, before winning 7-1 for a split.
Those were hardly the credentials to set up an upset scenario at UMD, where strong crowds of over 1,300 watched each game. There might have been some grumbling about such a major series being held so early in the season, but all the fans had to come away impressed with Minnesota’s team speed and great balance at both ends of the rink.
“I was really proud of our team,†said Minnesota coach Brad Frost, starting his second full year. “The seniors were leading, the returnees were working hard, and the young players really contributed. Then to come in here, where they were fired up with the banner-raising and all, and give them…really not much.Ââ€
Frost admitted that the first game was what he expected. He had played all three goalies the previous weekend, and said he thought freshman Alyssa Grogan had looked the sharpest, so she got the call in Game 1. “It was a typical, Minnesota-UMD game†he said.Ââ€We jumped out ahead, then they came roaring back to tie it up. I thought there was really good action up and down, especially in the second period.Ââ€
The surprise came in Game 2, when Frost expected more of the same, but UMD’s usual uprising never materialized. “We forechecked really hard,†Frost said. “And we were able to eliminate their transition game in the neutral zone.Ââ€
{IMG2}
Lura was perfect, but the Gophers prevented UMD from generating very many quality scoring chances. UMD’s sparkplug Emmanuelle Blais made several speedy break-ins, but mainly the Gophers reduced the Bulldogs offense to comparatively feeble long shots or feeds to the goal-mouth where Gopher back-checkers created heavy congestion.
The second game also was the forum for Minnesota’s freshman twins, Jocelyne and Monique Lamoureux, to indicate what value their presence brings to offset the graduation departures of top guns Erica McKenzie and Bobbi Ross.
In the first game, all four Gopher goals came on power plays, with Emily West and Monique Lamoureux scoring in the first period, and Gigi Marvin’s goal countering one by UMD’s Sara O’Toole for a 3-1 lead after two periods. UMD’s expected surge opened the third, with Saara Tuominen scoring at 0:09, and freshman Pernilla Winberg scoring at 4:23 to forge the 3-3 tie. Kim Martin and Grogan battled into overtime, when UMD fired six shots to none through four and a half minutes. Then, with 25 seconds left in the five-minute session, Melanie Gagnon took the only Gopher shot of overtime, converting Marvin’s power-play feed for the game-winner.
In the second game, Kim Martin came up with an early save on Emily West’s breakaway, but at 13:18, Monique Lamoureux carried up the left side and fired a shot that got through Martin, but struck the far, right pipe. It caromed out, but before Martin or any defending Bulldog could get to it, Jocelyne Lamooureux tapped it in for a 1-0 lead.
At 2:09 of the second period, the twins swapped roles, with Monique Lamoureux scoring after Jocelyne fed her.
The biggest surprise was yet to come. As coach Frost pointed out, a 2-0 lead means nothing in this series. But as the second period went on, the less-experienced Gophers – with six freshmen and four sophomores in the lineup – continued to disrupt UMD’s passing and win the battles for loose pucks. It was more of the same in the third, and the anticipated Bulldog uprising never happened.
UMD coach Shannon Miller said the question came down to which team was more hungry. That was true. And the answer was Minnesota. She also said the two losses wouldn’t mean all that much because of the length of the season, and that she thought UMD and Minnesota were probably the 1-2 teams in the country. Maybe so, but on the opening weekend of WCHA play, No. 1 didn’t play like No. 1, and the Gophers were Golden.
Volkswagen’s new CC deserves a grade of ‘AA’
This time, it appears Volkswagen Group got it right.
When Volkswagen brought out the late and only somewhat lamented Phaeton, it shot for the automotive sky, figuring that all those loyal patrons from around the world were just waiting for an extremely expensive luxury car wearing the familiar “VW†emblem on its hood. The Phaeton was a great car, too, and that VW stood huge on the grille. Too huge, most figured. Turned out, luxury car buyers who were used to choosing Mercedes, BMW, Audi and sometimes Porsche for their luxury wheels, wanted their Volkswagens to be Germany’s trustworthy but inexpensive line.
Back when the calendar turned to 2008, VW showed off a sleek, new sedan on the auto show circuit, and some cynics reacted predictably about the company trying to go luxury again. But now it is new car production introduction time, and when the new Volkswagen CC was introduced to the automotive media, it was clearly a hit, because it is larger and more luxurious than the Passat on which it is based, but its price starts in the upper $20,000 range, even though its features go well beyond some of the competition.
VW has come a long way since all its cars were named for winds – Golf for the gulfstream, Jetta for the jetstream, Scirocco for desert winds, etc. — and the obvious question about the new CC is, “Why CC?Ââ€
“It means ‘Comfortable Coupe,’ not ‘Cool Car,’ †said Laura Soave, marketing manager for Volkswagen of America, although she had the bemused look of a marketing type who wouldn’t mind at all if we called it a cool car.
The trend, ever since Mercedes first brought out the CLS, is to make shapely, smoothly-silhouetted four-door sedans that are so sleek they resemble coupes. A few companies have made one, and the rest are trying to. Volkswagen has pulled it off with a flair. Worldwide, with the renewed emphasis on emerging auto markets in China and India, and with new plants in Russia and India, Volkswagen now has passed Ford to rank No. 3 in manufacturing size, behind Toyota and General Motors.
Styling will lead consumers to examine the CC, and once they look, the car has the substance to make new fans. VW anticipates 28,000 U.S. sales in its first year, and is positioning the CC to expand the company footprint.
The front end is simplified, losing the large grille that seemed to be swiped from Audi, VW’s upscale sibling, and is narrow and horizontal, with more airflow welcomed under the bumper. Foglights flank the lower opening, and well-styled headlights are enclosed behind plexiglass above the foglights. The standout shape, however, is the silhouette, because it is a four-door sedan, but it has a contantly curving roofline that clears the large interior and slopes quite steeply to the rear deck. Its form is stretched just over an inch longer than the Passat, at 189.5 inches, and its width is also over an inch greater, while its height is two inches lower.
That sloping roofline does not intrude on rear headroom, which is easily adequate for 6-footers, and it leaves a deceptively huge trunk. The rear exterior is less creative than the rest of the artful design; taillights resemble the established norm, with two lights encased in red plastic, only the lights themselves are oval instead of round, in an attempt to vary from Jettas, Malibus, Impalas, and numerous others. The overall exterior, however, is stunning, particularly from the side view, which retains the eye-catching lines of the auto show concept.
The idea is that the Passat, currently VW’s largest sedan, competes right well with the Honda Accord, Toyota Camry, Nissan Altima, etc., but all of those midsize cars have grown larger. The more-compact Jetta will be aimed more at the enlarged compacts, where it will offer more room than the Honda Civic, Toyota Corolla, Ford Focus, and Mazda3. The CC comes out as an upscale model that shares components with the Passat, and Jetta — and Audi A4 — and can challenge the entry-luxury flock. The CC is a roomy, four-passenger sedan, while the Passat serves the more family-oriented five-passenger arrangement, so the CC aims at the BMW 3-Series, Lexus ES and IS, Cadillac CTS, Infiniti G35, and Lincoln MKZ. Various Volvo sedans, Lincoln’s MKS, and various Acura models also are in the CC’s line of fire, but one vehicle conspicuously missing from that list of competitors is the new Audi A4.
Volkswagen officials insist they find very little cross-shopping between Audi and Volkswagen buyers, which seems curious, particularly because they share some components. When asked about whether the CC uses Audi’s A4 platform, VW officials said that there are many variations in componentry, and they prefer to say the CC, Passat and Jetta share components. In an election year, we shouldn’t be surprised at such question-avoidance. But the comparison to Audi components would seem to benefit Volkswagen, which, parent company or not, must be aware at how consistently successful recent Audi models have been.
The new Audi A4 – a competitor with the CC for 2009 North American Car of the Year – is one of the best all-encompassing sedans introduced this year, if not for several years. Its sticker price has risen to about $34,000, but its design, powertrain and features are outstanding. The CC offers some A4 attributes, while undercutting its Audi cousin by several thousand dollars.
The comparison is begged when you realize that the front-wheel-drive CC’s base “S†model comes equipped with Audi’s 2.0-liter four-cylinder, a turbocharged, dual-overhead-camshaft, variable-valve-timed gem that can be bought with a slick six-speed manual transmission in the CC for a base price of $26,790 – $1,000 more than a Passat. Go up to a six-speed Tiptronic automatic and it’s $27,890.
Moving up to the Luxury model boosts the price to $31,990, still with the 2.0, but still under the A4 sticker.
{IMG2}
Selecting the VR6 Sport means replacing the 2.0 with a 3.6-liter V6, VW’s own well-refined, narrow-angle, transverse-mounted V6 pulling the front wheels, which boosts the price to $38,300. The loaded VR6 4Motion all-wheel-drive model, also with the 3.6, is $39,300 for a base price. All those prices require a $650 destination charge, but nevertheless, if you buy the base CC at around $27,000, you are getting Audi A4 performance with that six-speed stick and saving $7,000 off the bottom line. Model for model, the CC ranges about $1,000 more than the Passat.
Power differs between the engines, of course. The V6 has 280 horsepower and 265 foot-pounds of torque, which makes the CC perform with the stability of a solidly-planted and impressive luxury sedan. EPA fuel figures estimate 27 miles per gallon.
Potent performance from the V6 is a given, but the turbocharger boosts the four to a perfect high-fuel-cost compromise. Its 200 horsepower is backed by 207 foot-pounds of torque, which operates over a wide band, reaching a peak at barely past idle speed and holding it up into the high-revving horsepower band. The result is adequate performance if you don’t get onto the throttle too hard, and over-30-mpg in the process. Get on it, meanwhile, and you get V6-like performance. If fuel economy dips from a heavier right foot application, the driver can make the choice, with both choices available.
The 2.0-Turbo feels distinctly different, although both cars are models of precise steering and handling, but the four feels lighter, undoubtedly because of an altered weight-distribution because of the lighter engine, and it remains the jewel. On our introductory test, we drove from Atlanta to Nashville, which is about a four-hour drive. Without advocating that anyone should drive beyond the speed limit, we zeroed the trip computer at one spot where the traffic flow on that interstate was well above the posted 70. Some intrepid auto writers will do anything in the name of science (wink-wink), and we found ourselves cruising at 80 with gusts to 85, just to be amid the flow. During that stretch that included the 80-85 pace, we averaged 30.9 miles per gallon with the 2.0-Turbo four and the six-speed manual.
All the expected safety features of German cars are built in, with airbags all around, and interior features include an enormous moonroof, an excellent navigation system with a back-up video monitor, and all the multimedia devices to interact with audio and satellite radio systems.
New seat designs add comfort and support, and the various interior color schemes are pleasant and easy to like, with brushed silver trim instead of glare-sucking bright silver, and the instruments and controls laid out with predictable German ergonomics. Rear seat room is spacious, and the trunk is large enough for a family-of-four trip.
Challenger SRT8 powers Dodge to future-retro peak
PASADENA, CALIF. — The Dodge Challenger won’t be officially reborn until late this summer when it reaches showrooms. But trust me, it will be the biggest hit Chrysler Corporation has enjoyed since the minivan.
If you want the new “future-retro†Challenger, you would have to plunk down $38,000. Correct that. You would have HAD to plunk down $38,000 already, because the first-year’s allotment of Challengers lnumber 6,400, and all of them are bought and paid for. So you could queue up in line for one of next year’s expanded crop.
It appears to be a clever bit of marketing by Dodge, and everything has fallen into place very neatly. First, the only Challengers for its first year 2008 run will be SRT models, which means that Dodge’s Street and Racing Technology (SRT) high-performance gang is building the first batch. Having SRT build your car is a lot like having Ford’s SVT redo your Mustang, or Mercedes turning its coupes and sedans over the its AMG arm.
The difference is that Dodge decided to let SRT build the hot, high-performance Challenger version before the mainstream, everyday-performance model comes along, which undoubtedly will come with a V6 and be about not much more than half the price of the hot one. The best news there is that when Dodge puts, say, its 3.5 V6 into the car, and takes away the costly Brembo brakes, high-end suspension goodies, and maybe backs off a little on the interior, it still will be an outstanding car, because nobody is about to sabotage the car’s great balance, and, above all, its killer looks.
Extensive wind-tunnel testing and design engineering kept finding revisions tto make to the popular auto show-circuit concept car for production. And each time they made a revision, for technical reasons, the car took on less of the concept car’s look, and more of the original Challenger’s resemblance.
That should be seen as a good thing by most potential consumers, because the original Dodge Challenger is one of those rare cars that was great looking, and moderately popular, but has enjoyed increased popularity among car restorers, street rodders, and classic car fanciers. It could be argued that it is more popular now than it ever was when it had to slug it out against the original Mustang, Camaro, Firebird, Javelin, AMX, and its cousin, the Plymouth Barracuda.
The concept car Dodge designed three years ago was a hit of the Detroit and Chicago auto shows, and got such favorable reaction that there was no doubt Chrysler would follow along and build it as a production vehicle. Ford had done as much with the Mustang, recreating it more as a retro-styled copy of the 1970 car and revitalizing its popularity. Chevrolet did a similar design exercise as a retro Camaro, and it, too, met with considerable reaction, but its supposedly inevitable production is not yet determined.
So the new Challenger has the retro classic stage to itself, even in this era of $4 gasoline. Its looks are stunning, and its availability in red, black or silver further narrows the focus. At this point, there is no “plum crazy,†as in the original Challenger, which was its best in 1970, ’71 and ’72, and it came with numerous engines, from the everyday Slant 6 to a hot 340 V8, the venerable 383 V8, and the potent 440 V8, with special editions fitted with the 426 HEMI. The original HEMI was a 425-horsepower fire-breather that became more popular than the cars when it dominated NASCAR stock car racing and NHRA Pro-category drag-racing.
When the first emission-control standards of the 1970s ended performance among production cars, thanks to motorsports, the HEMI engines lived on. That engine’s basic design still dominates Top Fuel and Funny Car NHRA racers, where engine-building specialists start out with that block and wrench over 1,000 horsepower out of supercharged, nitro-burning versions. That was during and after the time that stock car racers like Richard Petty drove Plymouths and Dodges to NASCAR stardom. In those days, stock car mechanics and engine builders didn’t need much modification to make those HEMIs howl, because after being first built in 1966 it grew into the most powerful engine ever built by the corporation, when the stock 7-liter 426 produced 425 horsepower.
Modern technology smooths out the brutish potential of 30 years ago in the new Challenger. The 6.1-liter SRT8’s engine is a full liter of displacement less than the one that was stashed under the hood of the 1970 Challenger, but it develops the same 425 horsepower at 6,200 RPMs, and even more torque, with 420 foot-pounds peaking at 4,800 RPMs. Electronically limited to 6,400 RPMs, the new 6.1-liter HEMI has 69.8 horsepower per liter, which exceeds even the legendary old powerplant.
That engine and platform allowed the SRT fellows to make a couple of shortcuts, because they already had proven it in the Charger SRT8 and the Chrysler 300 SRT8, so laying it out with updated revisions and then plunking that sensuous Challenger two-door coupe body on it created a ready-made potent package. Stomp the gas at a stop and the Challenger SRT8 lunges from 0-60 in only 4.9 seconds. It takes 11.5 seconds to go from 0-100 mph, and a quarter-mile can be covered in 13.3 seconds. Top speed is 170 mph.
When the new Challenger was introduced to the media, we got a chance to drive it from Pasadena out to Willow Springs, a legendary old road-racing circuit with some twisting curves and a few hilly parts, and a couple decent straightaways. The great thing about that experience is that despite the fame the HEMI engine has gained from stock car and drag racing, the Challenger itself became famous in the heyday of the Sports Car Club of America’s Trans-Am road-racing series.
Sam Posey drove a lime green Challenger against the Mustangs of Parnelli Jones and George Follmer, Mark Donohue drove a Roger Penske Camaro, Swede Savage drove a Barracuda, and Jerry Titus drove a Firebird. I used to write about those races, which were among the most exciting motorsports events in the country. SRT has made sure that the Challenger’s legacy also would be translated into modern, real-world performance. A sophisticated suspension holds the car stable as it records 0.88 g on a skid pad, and its giant Brembo brakes stop it from 60-0 in only 110 feet. Test-cars have gone 0-100-0 in just under 17 seconds.
It was a fun day, overall, and Willow Springs offered a good chance to be impressed with how tight and solid the Challenger SRT8 is. But being on the highways, particularly the curving, mountainous highways between Pasadena and the track, was maybe more fun, and being in the car in city traffic was better yet, just because of all the waves, nods, smiles, and thumbs-up that the car inspired from everybody you went past.
The actual price is $37,995, which is a lot, but is a better deal when you realize that every facet – suspension, aerodynamics, interior, brakes, wheels, tires, and driveability – are revised and tuned to optimum to make sure the car works on everyday roads as well as when you push it all-out on a race track.
{IMG2}
Statistically, the Challenger is Overall length is – four inches shorter than the Charger sedan, at 197.7 inches, on a 116-inch wheelbase. Width is 75.7 inches, it stands only 57 inches tall. Ground clearance is 5.5 inches, and be careful not to roll up to a curb too eagerly with that chin spoiler. Curb weight is 4,140 pounds, with 55.6 percent on the front and 44.4 at the rear.
The coefficient of drag is an unspectacular 0.353, but partly because the spoilers front and rear are coordinated with anti-lift characteristics in mind, besides just drag. The concept car had a very different front end, but the production car resembles the 1970’s manner of having the upper leading edge of the grille protrude a bit. Wind tunnel testing divulged a problem with front lift with the original, to the point it threatened to tear off the front edge of the hood until designers stretched it out into a graceful beak.
From the side, the Challenger has the long hood/short rear deck of the ’70, as well as a similar rear pillar and the stdylish contours of the side of the body. Unique 20-inch Alcoa aluminum wheels are fully-forged, which eliminated about 6 pounds per wheel.
Antilock brakes and traction-control are standard, and Electronic Stability Control maintains directional stability in all conditions by deploying selective braking and throttle input to assure the car goes in the direction the steering wheel is suggesting. Those are safety features beyond the safety cage body structure, with crumple zones, side-guard door beams, and supplemental side-curtain airbags.
Limited room for two – preferably kids – make the back seat workable as a 2-plus-2, and trunk space is decent. Under normal conditions, I’d say the knockout design is the car’s strong point, but thanks to SRT, there might be an equal argument that its performance is the Challenger SRT8’s prime asset. Even if you never wanted to go faster than the freeway’s 70 mph, What goes unsaid is the extra thrill whenever you step on the gas, because the deep-throated rumble of the HEMI resonates to put your whole being on red alert.
By the time you’re able to buy one, the Challenger will have more models to choose from than the SRT8. But until more come along, the SRT8 is more than capable of standing alone.
Wild late additions make team better for playoffs
Playoff season is interesting in all pro sports, but in the National Hockey League, it takes on an entire identity of its own. If you ask any Canadian-bred player, coach, general manager, or, presumably, fan, the answer is unanimous – they would rather do well in playoffs and win the Stanley Cup than win or even dominate throughout the regular season.
In baseball, a team that contends for a divisional pennant, or loses in playoffs, is clearly successful. In pro football, the New England Patriots have done so well over the past two seasons that the entire nation considers them the standard of the NFL – even though they have lost the past two Super Bowls.
But in the NHL, a team that overwhelms its division during regular season play and goes through a round or two of playoffs, considers the season a failure if it doesn’t win the Stanley Cup. Likewise, a team that sputters in seeded 16th is convinced it can make up for a mediocre season by getting hot enough to stickhandle through the minefield of playoffs and take a run at winning the Stanley Cup.
Minnesota hockey fans may be more sophisticated, and more sympathetic, than the standard-issue Canadian NHL zealot, so they already consider this a highly successful season for their division-winning lads. But they also may have overlooked the fact that the Wild are better-suited to making a legitimate run at the Stanley Cup than at any other time in their brief history.
My pick is the Wild to beat the Avs, Peter Forsberg and all, and it will be a series of close, low-scoring games, even though the Wild could win in five.
Briefly, elsewhere around the playoffs, I like Detroit, the league’s top point producer, and a team with Pavel Datsyuk, Henrik Zetterberg, and Niklas Lidstrom, and a goalie tandem of Dominik Hasek and Chris Osgood, to make short work of Nashville in five. In two extremely difficult match-ups that I think may both go seven, Anaheim will beat Dallas, as wily Brian Burke found a way to keep Teemu Selanne and Scott Neidermayer fresh – give them the first half of the year off! Meanwhile, Chris Pronger proves that if Lidstrom is slowing down at all, he’s ready to assume the mantel of the NHL’s best defenesman. San Jose will beat Calgary, because an inspired and inspirational Joe Thornton will outplay 50-goal-scoring ace Jarome Iginla.
In the East, Montreal should handle Boston in five, and that’s giving the Bruins a chance to win a game, after being swept in all eight meetings this season. I like Ottawa to surprise Pittsburgh, but it will be a wild and goal-filled seven games. Consider the matchup in firepower: Pittsburgh’s Sidney Crosby (24 goals) Evgeni Malkin (47) and Marian Hossa (29) have all the press clippings, while Senators Jason Spezza (34 goals), Dany Heatley (41) and Daniel Alfredsson (40) give Ottawa that edge, 115-100. But Alfredsson must get healthy. Washington will beat Philadelphia, only because Alexander Ovechkin 65-47—112) is the best scorer in the NHL; and New Jersey will once again prove that grit, determination, and Minnesotans named Paul Martin, Zach Parise, and Jamie Langenbrunner will offer enough offense, while Martin Brodeur again proves that age is no requisite in choose the best goaltenders.
Meanwhile, back to the Minnesota Wild. The difference in their series might be late signees – with the Avalanche signing Peter Forsburg, and the Wild signing Chris Simon. If you’ve read anything about Simon, it hasn’t been good. But my suspicion is that better things are coming, from his play, and from the so-far negative media reports.
Through their formative years, the Minnesota Wild have not been realistic challengers for the Cup. The Wild have had good players, led by the electrifying Marian Gaborik, and constantly outstanding goaltending. When they advanced to the Cup semifinals a few years ago, they excited the whole State of Hockey, but they were trying to do it with more hope than substance. Last season, the Wild came close. They lost in the first round, but the series was tough, and the team they lost to was the Anaheim Ducks, which used the victory over the Wild as a springboard to go all the way and win the Stanley Cup. When the Ducks had won it all, Wild fans could go back and appreciate their team even more for the challenge they threw at Anaheim.
The Ducks stretched the parameters of newly restricted NHL rules, and also got by with it. Jean-Sebastien Giguere was great in goal, but the difference in the Ducks was general manager Burke, who once ranged off the wing for the Edina Hornets before a college career at Providence and then an NHL career that has since been eclipsed by his work in league and team administration.
If the Wild can get past a typically strong Colorado Avalanche outfit in the first round, anything can happen. Winning home ice by capturing the division also is an enormous edge, because of the “Team of 18,000†that the Wild boasts about. But the most intriguing thing about the Wild this spring is that their skill players, always impressive, are likely to play at a consistently higher level, home and road, because of a couple curious additions for this season – Sean Hill and Chris Simon.
Adding Hill, a Duluth native, wasn’t controversial, except for the fact that he had to sit out the first half of the season for failing the NHL’s play-enhancing substance test. Hill, who swears he never took such a thing, did have an NHL exclusion for treatment of a personal hormonal imbalance. It may not be that one caused an effect that led to the other, but Hill isn’t a fool, and he would have had to be one to take any illegal substances when he knew he would be under scrutiny for his approved medication. Hill came in as a free-agent from the New York Islanders, where he was among the league leaders in hits and shot-blocking, as well as having a cannon for a shot. Although he was a veteran, he played 23 minutes a game.
Simon’s addition was far more controversial. Never has a pro athlete been brought into the Twin Cities with more ridicule. Both Twin Cities newspapers, all the television sports anchors, and every talk-radio show within broadcasting distance blasted the Wild for taking a player whose reputation has been for going over the edge to assault opponents, leading to suspensions that have been as severe as they have been commonplace.
Everybody agreed the Wild needed to add a free agent star, not a thug. They could have added Peter Forsberg, or Sergei Federov – imagine that – but instead, they signed only Chris Simon, an NHL bad boy convicted long before he could spend a day in Minnesota’s sports-fan court. John Russo of the Minneapolis Star Tribune immediately set off columnists Pat Reusse, Jim Souhan – do these guys ever read each other’s columns before nearly duplicating them? — and, of course, Sid Hartman.
Russo made up a box with all the horrible things Simon had been suspended for, including being tossed for hammering Jarkko Ruutu. That was the one that stopped me, because only a few weeks earlier, Russo had written that Ruutu was “the most despised player in the NHL.Ââ€
Why? Because he blindsides foes, injures them with cheap hits, and generally escapes notice. That, incidentally, was the common thread running through the list of victims of Chris Simon. Yes, he’s tough. Yes, he seems mild-mannered and soft-spoken away from the game. Yes, he can play the game, and shoot the puck and score some heavy-traffic goals. And, yes, when someone does something particularly nasty and unnoticed to him or a teammate, Chris Simon can blow his cork and do a scary number on the perpetrator.
The Wild have Derek Boogaard, the heavyweight champ of the league, who stood out on the finesse-and-flash Wild team so much that every time he collided with an opponent he seems virtually assured of a ticket to the penalty box. If you go back to last season’s stretch drive, you’ll also recall that Brent Burns, who we’ve had the luxury of watching grow from a gangly teenager to a solid defenseman, added a new dimension by being attacked a couple of times and responding by punching out clearcut victories, which even surprised him. That added toughness has allowed Burns to blossom this year into a league standout.
The Wild bolstered Boogaard and Burns with the addition of Adam Voros, and Todd Fedoruk, two more willing combatants if things get too tough for the finesse guys to dangle. Hill gave the Wild another dimension by making it very uncomfortable to spend any time in front of Niklas Backstrom in the Wild goal. True, Hill didn’t play enough for quite a while, and a 30-something veteran needs to play to retain adequate quickness. When Kurtis Foster broke his leg, tragically, near season’s end, Hill got more ice time, and responded by playing better and better, getting sharper, and even scoring goals in two successive games. He gives the youthful Wild another veteran with playoff savvy, like Keith Carney, with the added edge of blowing people out from in front of the net.
{IMG2}
Then comes Simon. With Boogaard, Voros and Fedoruk, there was a nice balance of toughness to accompany the swift-striking capabilities of Gaborik, Pavel Demitra, Brian Rolston, Pierre-Marc Bouchard, Mark Parrish, and other forwards, giving them room to make their flashy plays. Mikko Koivu is excluded from those needing help to get room, because he has become the prototype Jacques Lemaire forward – gifted offensively, but more important, flawless in his approach to offense, because he first pays dedicated attention to defensive responsibilities.
Now add Simon to the mix, and the Wild not only have a nice balance, they have more than a nasty balance when it comes to playoffs and opponents – such as the Anaheim Ducks – who might decide they can forcefully take a finesses team off its game and into its summer vacation. When I first read the ridicule, the insults, the outright displays of media righteousness against the Wild ever bringing such a thug to the Twin Cities, my first reaction was that with the arrival of Simon, every skater on the Wild team grew another couple inches in the freedom to perform.
The fans had no choice but to react with similar outrage to all the media outpouring, and call-ins and letters to the editor assailed the Wild for bringing in a criminal element to our clean-cut team. Overlooked by the quick-to-rip, the Wild has enough talent – sheer talent – to go all the way. But only if that talent performs to near capacity every night – not just at home, not just against non-physical foes.
We didn’t hear much criticism when a nasty fight broke out right at the end of the regular season, and there was Chris Simon, making short work of a nasty foe who appeared to be wishing he had been a bit less nasty. In fact, Pierre-Marc Bouchard, he of the amazing puck-handling skills, got into the first fight he’d ever been in, after being speared for all to see on videotape but unseen by any of the officials. I am not going to say that Bouchard wouldn’t have fought, had he been speared under other circumstances, but I will say with certainty that it was a lot easier for him to react in a manner that could gain more room – as well as confidence – for himself, because of the presence of a fellow like Simon. And I also enjoyed the reaction of the Team of 18,000, when they roared their approval that Chris Simon had been welcomed into the family.
The media guys who don’t cover/don’t understand hockey assume that talent always wins, so if you have 15 skilled guys, you should add a 16th. Fortunately, general manager Doug Risebrough knows how important it is for skilled players to be able to free-wheel with confidence, at home and on the road, and he landed Simon for bargain-basement help at the trading deadline. Lemaire loves dedicated workers who look at handling the responsible stuff first, and he also loves to have so many highly skilled players to engage and win if a goal-scoring rally is required. But Jacques knows, too, that skilled teams can disappear under physical attack – especially in a playoff series – and that 15 skilled guys can have far more hope for success if they have a few of those less-skilled guys who can cruise around out there like big, hungry sharks, without even having to state the obvious – “You do something nasty to one of my boys, and be prepared to deal with me.Ââ€
A year ago, Lemaire complained that Anaheim seemed to be going beyond the limits of physical play that other teams, including his, seemed to be governed by. The league did nothing, and whether it wanted to or not, the league handed the Cup over to the Ducks.
Lemaire and Risebrough have been crafty in their development of the Wild, but they both adhere to the philosophy that, while they prefer a skating game, if the league is going to allow a bit of extra roughness at playoff time, ’tis better to give than to receive. That’s different for the Stanley Cup, of course, where it’s better to receive. But the two are related, and while it’s still a long-shot, the Wild are built for a major run into springtime.
About the Author
John Gilbert is a lifetime Minnesotan and career journalist, specializing in cars and sports during and since spending 30 years at the Minneapolis Tribune, now the Star Tribune. More recently, he has continued translating the high-tech world of autos and sharing his passionate insights as a freelance writer/photographer/broadcaster. A member of the prestigious North American Car and Truck of the Year jury since 1993. John can be heard Monday-Friday from 9-11am on 610 KDAL(www.kdal610.com) on the "John Gilbert Show," and writes a column in the Duluth Reader.
For those who want to keep up with John Gilbert's view of sports, mainly hockey with a Minnesota slant, click on the following:
Click here for sports