Too Long for Twitter- September 13th

1. Paul Ranger has a lot of Leafs fan excited because of his teary-eyed camp interview, but hockey wise he said something extremely interesting and I’m just going to copy and paste the entire quote for you to read: “[People think talent is everything in sports, but] it’s not even close. There’s pieces to the puzzle for every athlete. A big part of it is obviously genetics, that’s a huge part … another big piece of that is fitness. I got that drilled into me when I was younger, in my early 20s, how that could take you to the next level and you could compete with the best players in the world. And the other part, which I think is the biggest part of the game, is the mental side. I think that’s the biggest side of life. Everyone has the power to do whatever they want, and that’s something that I’ve learned along the way. There’s all kinds of aspects to the game, and it’s interesting, because the mental side of the game is something that’s never really been talked about a lot, or trained. Self-esteem, just mental strength, courage … Some guys develop [it] without even knowing it; superstitions, rituals, stuff like that. It’s not talked about a lot. But it’s a skill.” 
2. I bring up that quote because this week I actually had the privilege of sitting in on a sports psychologist lesson with a Jr. A team and it was very fascinating stuff. As you’d expect, especially at that age (16-21 year olds, I believe), a lot of the players are pretty macho in their approach to it all but there was one part that got my attention. The psychologist was able to get the players to open up about their fears on the ice, and some of them were very honest about being scared to make mistakes because it’s embarrassing to do so in front of their fans, family, teammates, coaches, etc. Sure, Jr. A hockey is nothing to sneeze at, but on a good day teams play in front of a couple 100 people yet there they were being worried about being shown up in front of them. That really got me thinking about NHLers and making mistakes. If you play for the Leafs and screw up, you do so directly in front of 20,000 people, plus what has to be at least a couple 100,000 more on TV and highlight packs while you play for millions of dollars. That’s heavy stuff. That’s pressure every single day because nobody cares if you scored a hat-trick last week if you’re getting scored on regularly this week.
3.  When Chad Kilger was with the Leafs he was on the FAN590 (I wish I could find the link), and they asked him about being the fourth overall pick yet struggling to ever live up to that. He discussed how after being drafted, he made the Ducks, and when he was there that season the coaching staff really hammered away at him (Ron Wilson was the head coach but I don’t 100% recall whether he said it was Wilson specifically so I don’t want to blame him). Kilger discussed how the video of his game was shown to him after each and every game, about what he was doing wrong, and how he was being judged on such a miniscule scale that it weighed down on him and crushed his confidence. From there he said he only went downhill in his career. Kilger spent the majority of the next two seasons in the AHL (he was part of the Selanne deal at the end of his first year in Anaheim), before finally sticking with Chicago and carving out a career. Kilger was a serviceable NHLer at the end of the day, but if you look at his raw tools, he had it all: 6’4, can skate like the wind, has a bomb of a shot (recorded something like 105mph at the Leafs skills competition one year), and is physical, but it never came together for him. Kilger eventually (and abruptly) quit hockey for undisclosed reasons. He’s a great example of a guy who needed help with the mental side of hockey more than anything, and probably never got it.
4. Conversely, when Michael Grabner broke out with the Islanders confidence was all he talked about. “Beginning of the year, I kept making mistakes. Coaches explained it to me, showed me video and kept putting me out there. That gives you confidence as a player and you obviously don’t try to make the same mistakes again,” said Grabner. Then he went to the all-star game and won the fastest skater contest and he said that really brought his confidence to a whole new level because it showed him he’s basically the fastest player in the NHL. This is such a mental game and we barely even recognize it.
5. All the rage in hockey is analytics, but I’ll tell you this right now: Whoever can master how to work the mental side of hockey is really going to be the group that’s far ahead of everyone else. Every player has skill or some form ability because you don’t make the NHL if you don’t (fighters aside). It’s the mental side of things that really separate players apart.
6. Although this is about football, I really recommend reading this article on the Seattle Seahawks and what they do to manage the mental side of sport. I find this stuff extremely interesting because even at the minor hockey level I see coaches yell at players every single time they make mistakes, and it shouldn’t always be like that. You have to be able to communicate to each player on an individual level and find out what makes them tick.  
7. It’s very interesting to see Cody Franson and Jared Cowen still unsigned because I think it speaks to how hard it is to put a number on a defenseman. Yeah Derek Stepan is also an RFA, but Sather always plays hardball with his own guys so it’s not even a little surprising. It’s just extremely difficult to quantify a defenseman because it’s so important, there are so few spots for them, and it is a very complicated position. At forward, what it really comes down to is, if you’re a top six forward you’ll get paid according to your tier of production and how you stack up against others. If you’re a grinder you’ll get paid according to your role, how much ice time you can eat up, how effective you are and so on. It’s not exactly easy signing a forward, but it’s a lot easier than signing a defenseman. How much do you value points on the backend? Is he in your top four but not good enough to play against top competition? Does he play against top competition yet not excel there? How do you put a price on those numbers? Franson and Cowen, according to reports, seem very far apart from their team’s in terms of what numbers they should be getting.
8. I don’t know if this was intentional but as much as people think Nonis is backed into a corner, it’s really Franson that is. The Leafs will more than likely let Franson walk if he gets an offer sheet that would bring the Leafs a first and third round pick, and the only good teams that have the cap space to take that on without making a move right now are Ottawa (no money), and the Islanders (notoriously cheap). The Leafs are basically calling the bluff that no team will offer sheet Franson so that he has to cave because he won’t have any other options. Barring something unforeseen, it should work, and it’s a very smart strategy. As soon as Franson’s agents didn’t file for arbitration Nonis probably sat back and went “we are signing him on our terms now because he has no choice.” In the meantime, the Leafs buy some time for Morgan Rielly to get a long look. I don’t want to blow it out of proportion, and Nonis does have to get Franson locked up soon, but he kind of Walter White’d Kadri and Franson if he gets them both to sign cheap two year deals.
9. Considering it’s becoming a “thing” now to talk about how heavily involved analytics are in hockey currently, it was extremely interesting to see the Behind the B video of the Bruins deciding to trade Seguin. Seguin is a young star in the making on paper, but the Bruins conversation basically went along the lines of “he doesn’t play our kind of hockey or fit into our system.” They acknowledged he’s probably a 35-40 goal man, but what was important to them was playing “Bruins hockey.” Team culture is pretty well openly mocked on Twitter, yet here was one of the most successful team’s in hockey over the last few years discussing a huge move and the main sticking points seemed to be (and this is according to what they showed us), culture, team play, attitude, effort level, and so on. This isn’t being said to slag down on analytics because I’ve written about how they can play a role. I’m saying this to point out how extremely valuable some of the things that are laughed at and mocked on Twitter and blogs are. And, as outsiders, we only know so much information because we aren’t around the team or in the dressing room. There’s too much assuming that we know it all from behind our computer screens.
10. The second interesting thing from that video is how the Bruins believed they won the Kessel deal. Look, the Bruins won a Cup after trading Kessel so you can judge the deal narrowly all you want but you can’t say they’ve lost overall. What I question is this: If the Bruins had Kessel the last four years, are we talking about them as the elite team they are now, or a possible dynasty? Do they blow a 3-0 series lead to Philly with Kessel? Do they beat Chicago this year with Kessel? We’ll never be able to say for sure, but I’d rather have had Kessel in my line-up the last few years over Seguin because he’s better right now. So think about the Bruins having an elite player instead of a very good one during the last few seasons, and wonder what heights they might have been able to achieve. Did Boston still win that deal, or did they sell their team a little short on the current window they have right now for championships while Chara is still amazing?
11. Clarke MacArthur was quietly a very funny guy in Toronto, and so far this week he’s actually had the best line in the NHL. When asked if the Leafs can get over game 7 from last year, he responded “I hope not.” He burst out laughing afterward.
12. Six years ago the Sabres gave Derek Roy a six year deal worth $24 million hoping that it would become a steal. Buffalo ended up getting some years out of Roy and if he didn’t get so banged up (or had a falling out with Ruff), he might very well still be on the team. As it is, the Sabres ended up dealing him and the deal probably never worked out as great as they hoped it would. It wasn’t really a win or a loss either way; it was really just a decent deal. Six years later that deal must not have bothered Darcy Regier because he basically gave Cody Hodgson the same sort of move. We’ll see how this one goes.
13. Hockey Central noted that players such as Kronwall, Datsyuk and Zetterberg, along with head coach Mike Babcock, all lobbied Ken Holland for Cleary to be retained because he’s such a valuable guy on and off the ice. To me that is one of the greatest compliments you can receive as a player: the utmost respect from your peers and coaches. Detroit used to, and probably still does, have this motto that you take care of your top players, and your grinders, and if those guys are in place, the players in between will come together. Of course, the Wings used to revolve around the Yzerman’s and Fedorov’s, but they always had the grind line with the Draper’s and Maltby’s too.
14. It seems like the NHL very quietly shortened the length of goalie pads, as guys like Bernier and Niemi have had to reduce their pads by an inch (I’m sure there are more, but these are the two I know of). Niemi said that it’s all basically the same, except his five-hole is a little more vulnerable. Meanwhile, Bernier said that a few pucks have eluded him. I’ll be interested to see if there’s a noticeable difference in pucks trickling by goalies, especially through the five-hole. Might change the dynamic of the shootout a little bit more than expected. 
15. Wanted to wish happy retirements from the NHL to two excellent players in Tomas Kaberle and Miikka Kiprusoff. It really ticks me off when players of this ilk, whose play went from excellent to barely being able to keep up, receive a bunch of smart ass comments when they announce they are done by people on all mediums. Kipper might be the best goalie Calgary has ever had, and Kaberle was probably the Leafs best defenseman for a small era in their history regardless of it not being a great time in the franchise’s time. These were all-stars. I don’t want to go on some “show respect” rant, but recognize how great these players truly were. I know as a kid growing up in Toronto and playing defense, I wanted nothing more than to have Kaberle’s poise and passing ability, and I tried to play like him all the time. It was a privilege to watch you play, Kaba; and one of the greatest underdog Cup runs I’ve ever seen was led by you Kipper. Happy retirements, fellas.

Coach Stats vs. GM Stats

Last week the National Post published a story centered on the Leafs Jay McClement and in it McClement referenced some of the stats that the coaching staffs tracks and utilizes. After pointing it out as an interesting tool I received some replies that said it was basically a useless waste of time. I couldn’t disagree more. As someone who coaches hockey I consider some of the things the Leafs coaching staff tracks to be useful as a teaching mechanism for my players, and if I had access to those stats for my team I would use them all the time to breakdown plays, consistencies, weaknesses, strengths, etc.  The thing is, most of these stats are not great indicators of long-term sustainability with the ability to project the future well. Herein lays the key fact of the matter that there are differences between coaching stats and GM stats and those different stats have different values depending on your position and what you’re trying to achieve.

My goal here isn’t to breakdown all the stats and assign them labels as a “coach stat” or “GM stat;” what I’m really trying to do is discuss how stats have various strengths and weaknesses, and how they can help or hurt our judgement depending on how we are viewing the game.

A good place to start would be discussing the stats in question that the Leafs used. There were only two named and they were tracking turnovers-takeaway ratios, and tracking hitting location, both of which I’d say are fairly peripheral for a GM but can be important for a coach to use.

We already know how the Leafs breakdown turnovers, because they’ve told us. Carlyle records turnovers in three categories: 1- Guy is playing as an individual, 2- Offensive player takes chance 3- 'Brain-dead.’ What that really means when it comes to the Leafs tracking turnovers is that they want to erase “3.” You can show a player his CORSI and it will mean absolutely nothing and have no effect on his game whatsoever, but if you’re breaking down his turnovers with him maybe that leads to a swing of shots on net against, to a few more shots for.

A player such as Lupul, for example, is encouraged to try and create offense so while you of course never want to see him turn the puck over, it will obviously happen. As an offensive player you can live with him taking a chance, it not working, and losing the puck. If you don’t encourage him to try things he isn’t going to produce to his full capabilities. However, a player like Lupul has also been known to turn the puck over in his own zone and that’s the stuff you need to work with him on. If you tell a player he turns the puck over too much that’s not going to do anything, but if you sit with him and breakdown where he is making his mistakes specifically and what the problems are, you can use that to teach and instruct.

Furthermore, that turnover description can also be broken down through player roles. Yes the Leafs let Phil Kessel take chances (and again, I’m just using the Leafs as an example here but this applies to every team really), because he’s in a scoring role and that’s what they ask him to do. However, a player like Jay McClement is in a grinding role so the Leafs aren’t as comfortable with him falling under the “1” category. If McClement loses the puck once or twice a game because he’s tried to beat a defenseman one-on-one, that’s probably not acceptable because that’s not his role. I’d wager a guess that they would ask him to chip and chase, or pass the puck to the trailer, instead of deking.

Showing players the type of turnovers they make and what they can and can’t do is how you preach puck management. You can’t just show a player his possession stats and think that’s going to change anything; you need to look into what’s causing that and how you change that. Specifically breaking down turnovers is one way that can be done.

That takes us to tracking hits. Hits have some, little, or no value at all depending on your beliefs, but knowing where a guy is making his hits can be valuable in maximizing a player’s efficiency. Regardless of where you stand on the value of a hit, the ability to hit a guy, separate him from the puck, and retrieve it for possession is important and valuable for any player to have. If player X and player Y both throw 100 hits, and X has 25 hits that change possession while Y has 35, player Y is obviously more valuable physically and I’d like to see the breakdown of X’s hits to see why he’s being physical yet not able to change possession as much.  Although Dustin Brown is a much better player than Cal Clutterbuck, I would compare their hitting styles (as their hit counts are usually similar) and guess that Brown is much more effective at hitting on the forecheck and getting the puck versus Cal Clutterbuck who more so finishes a lot of his checks. As a coach you can’t just shrug and say “well I have Cal Clutterbuck who hits a lot but isn’t very effective at doing so to turn the puck over,” you actually need to try and find ways to maximize his skillset. That’s what good coaches do.

Basically, if I’m a GM am I taking a player who throws a lot of hits that don’t really do anything and hope he changes? No. But if I’m coaching said player because he’s already on my roster, it might (hopefully) be beneficial to track his hit location and try to coach him on how to better use his physicality. Because the Leafs are the team in question who use this stat, I would look at Nik Kulemin and suggest he’s excellent at hitting to get the puck back. The Leafs just brought David Clarkson in and he is a physical player, but if his hit totals aren’t leading to anything that changes puck possession, Nikolai Kulemin is a player that I would use as a model for him to try and use his physicality as (note: this is an example, not a fact; from what I’ve seen Clarkson is great at dumping the puck in and retrieving it physically).

A more appropriate example would be using hit location to track defensive positioning. If the opponent has the puck in the offensive zone corner, passes it off, and then the defenseman on my team goes out of his way to finish his check, he isn’t helping my team and more often than not he’s just putting himself out of position. It would be more appropriate (at least in my view), for the defenseman to locate where the puck is going and get into proper position rather than taking a few additional strides and seconds to finish that type of minimal hit.

There’s no doubt that this is a little thing, but if a coach get a forward who hits a lot to throw 20 more hits over the course of the year that cause a change in possession and that leads to say, two extra goals, while also showing his defensemen when to finish hits in the D-zone and when not to, and that leads to getting into position better and preventing three goals against that otherwise probably would have happened, then that’s a win. A coach can only use what he has –something that is too often forgotten online—so if he’s getting players to be just a little more effective than usual that’s a win.

A lot of the stats used on the internet now are rather ineffective for a coach to use. Are you going to tell a player he has a high or low PDO? What’s that going to change? If a player isn’t scoring but has a lot of chances, he knows to keep going because they will eventually go in. We hear players say that all the time, they don’t need to know their PDO. But should a GM understand that stat to help decide if a player had a career year? Yes. If you’re telling a player to cross the blueline and throw the puck on net to help his CORSI, that’s probably going to make him even worse and make his shooting percentage a wasteland. Yes these stats are sometimes able to help us predict the future, but in terms of using them to teach a player how to make adjustments and correct these stats in and of themselves, they really do just about nothing.

Even in Moneyball, we see the staff talking to players about things such as “if you take a first pitch strike, your batting average drops ___ for the rest of the at bat” versus telling a player “your OBP is too low, now you know, so change that.” Is OBP useful in baseball? Of course. Is it useful in terms of teaching a player how to self-improve though? Not really.

What it really boils down to is coaches use certain stats to cover the nuances of the game, and the GM uses overarching stats that look at the big picture to ask “what’s all this work really producing?” There are many ways to use analytics to help a hockey team and just because something doesn’t directly incorporate shot-counts or goal counts doesn’t mean it’s useless. Getting more shots and more goals is always the goal of anyone working in hockey, but part of the process is breaking down actual gameplay into singular events and seeing where improvements can be made.

This is why, I believe, many coaches are terrible GMs. Mike Keenan (Luongo trade) and Darryl Sutter (Phaneuf trade) immediately come to mind. Being a GM takes a certain mind frame where you always project the future, work within the parameters of the cap, juggle expiring veteran contracts with the rookies in your organization and so on. The best GMs are ones that can properly analyze and predict the future and when to buy low and sell high.

Whereas coaches look at players and see “I like this size in my line-up” or “I want that guy because he wins a lot of battles.” It’s a completely different thought process.

So next time you see an organization discuss how a stat they use, really take a second to consider how they might be using that stat before you instantly criticize it simply because you don’t agree with it. 

Too Long for Twitter- September 4th

1. Prior to this season Niklas Kronwall had 17 points in the 19 career games he had played in without Niklas Lidstrom. In his first full season without Lidstrom Kronwall threw up 29 points in 48 games which prorates to roughly 50 points (a point below his career high). No Lidstrom has translated into over a minute more of power play ice time per game than Kronwall is used to and that caused him to have his second highest power play point season behind that 51 point career year. Amazing what opportunity can do.
2. Went under the radar but it’s neat that days before the draft Preds GM David Poile said that if Seth Jones dropped to four he would take him, and that he’s the best player available in the draft. Lots of times after the fact we hear teams pump up their picks and say “we had him rated higher than where we got him,” but there was Poile saying it beforehand. The Preds have seven D under contract and don’t appear interested in signing any of the remaining UFA D-men so it will be interesting to see first round picks Ryan Ellis and Jones battle for ice time with fourth rounder Mattias Ekholm and undrafted Viktor Bartley. 
3. Was going through my twitter favourites and found this little gem courtesy dobber hockey: “Over last 3 yrs when Nathan Horton was out of lineup, Krejci had 29 points in 47 gmes (0.62).Otherwise he had 128 in 154 (0.83).” That doesn’t include playoffs. David Johnson also wrote a bit on Horton increasing his linemates shooting percentages.  Iginla figures to replace Horton and he’s been really effective as a scorer the last two years (100 points in 126 games), but how will Krejci, and Lucic, do without him?
4. After 48 games in the 2011-2012 season, Malkin led the league in scoring with 67 points. During the 48 game 2013 season Marty St. Louis won the scoring title with 60 points (which was what the 2011-2012 number two scorer, Giroux, had after 48 games). Stamkos had 32 goals at the 48 game threshold which was what Ovechkin won the Rocket with this season. Phoenix was the only team not to be in a playoff spot after 48 games and make it (then they went on a run to the conference finals). I don’t know how much stock to put into last year’s 48 game season, but it’s funny how it’s all pretty relative.
5. Found two tweets about 10^th overall pick Valerie Nichushkin from earlier in the year that I think are interesting. The first is "Talked to an NHL Euro scout today: "If Nichushkin isn't selected either first or second overall, it's only because of the Russian factor." The second is “I asked top Euro #nhldraft prospect Valeri Nichushkin how confident he is that he'll be playing in the NHL next yr- "100 percent sure." Those are two eyebrow raising things to say. If Nichushkin is what some from across the pond think he is, Dallas could have a formidable top six forward group with he, Jamie Benn, Tyler Seguin, Ray Whitney, Erik Cole and one of Rich Peverley or Cody Eakin. If he struggles this is the kind of thing scouts and management teams will remember that drop Russian’s stocks.
6. In 2007-2008 the Tampa Bay Lightning had 40% of their cap space tied into Lecavalier, Richards and St. Louis. If it weren’t for the Bobby Ryan trade the Ducks would have had 34% tied into Getzlaf, Perry and Ryan in 2013-2014. After this season the Penguins will have over $25 million committed to Crosby, Malkin and Letang. How long is that going to last? The Lightning and Ducks were both adamant that they weren’t going to break up their big three’s either, and each team had won Cups with pretty well all those guys (save for Ryan really) as key components to those Cups.
7. Of all things Leafs fans have complained about when it comes to Franson and Kadri being unsigned, I’m surprised not much has been made about the general thought process of the Leafs originally giving Franson a one year deal to begin with. Obviously hindsight is 20-20, but the Leafs gave Franson a one year, one million dollar deal right after the lockout and really made things tough on them more than anything. Even if you give Franson a little more money to make it a two year deal, he’s still moveable if he struggles again. Someone would take a chance on a 6’5, right handed D-man if he had a year remaining on even a $2M cap hit because he still oozes potential. Instead, a quick 48 games on a shortened season later Franson lit up the league and now wants to be paid. The only way the Leafs would have been smart to sign Franson to that deal was if he struggled so that they could have easily cut ties afterwards. Just always seemed like a weird deal to me, and now it’s come back to bite them. The lesson is that you don’t handout one year bridge contracts.
8. Corey Crawford has a career .913sv% in 152 games on what’s been a very good Blackhawks team, is that worth $6M a season for a guy turning 30 when it kicks in? I don’t think so. The crazy thing, though, is looking around at the goalie market and seeing who else makes over $5M- Carey Price (career .915), Cam Ward (consistently hurt), Sergei Bobrovsky (one great year), Mike Smith (up and down career with one amazing season), along with some truly established goalies such as Jonathon Quick, Pekka Rinne, Ryan Miller and Henrik Lundqvist. Goaltending has to be the hardest position to pay for because it’s so up and down and there really are only a handful of consistently elite goalies. When it comes to Crawford specifically I guess my main thought is that I think there are at least 15 other goalies they could have won the Cup with this year, and I don’t think it was a coincidence Ray Emery looked amazing in Chicago, so to me you don’t pay high end money for that. In Chicago’s defense, they don’t have any major players that need contracts until Toews and Kane are both UFAs two years from now.
9. The longer the Derek Stepan contract holdout goes, the more it hurts the Rangers. Considering Ryan Callahan and Carl Hagelin are both out to start the year as they recover from surgeries, the Rangers can’t really afford to not have Stepan either as that’s literally half of their top six gone. Sather’s notoriously a tough negotiator with his own players, but if things really hit the fan Stepan can easily sit back and watch the Rangers struggle without him, Callahan, and Hagelin for at least a month. This seems like the remaining RFA negotiation that could get the ugliest.
10. I didn't think Florida would make the playoffs last year but most people note it as a lack of possession regression and I think that’s a little too simplistic. Weiss and Versteeg, 2/3rds of their top line, were basically out/useless for the year and they lost their second best defenseman Jason Garrison. They also lost their seventh leading scorer Mikael Samuelsson and key grinder Sean Bergenheim didn’t play a game this year, and Theodore was dreadful compared to the playoff season. That's a lot to lose. Who did they replace those key guys with? Filip Kuba, Peter Mueller, Alex Kovalev and Jonathan Huberdeau to start, and other than Huberdeau everyone was pretty bad. 48 games later, Florida looks like they are back to rebuilding. Funny how quickly things change.
11. The second point to Florida’s reversal is that they did nothing to build on their playoff season. Tallon couldn’t have predicted Weiss and Versteeg would be no-shows on the year, but replacing Garrison with Kuba was always going to be a disaster plus he never added quality depth. This is one reason I’ll be interested to see how the Leafs do this year in comparison to the Habs. You can say what you want about the Leafs offseason, but Clarkson is better than MacArthur, Bolland is a more appropriate shutdown center than Grabovski and some youth should stick full-time now in Colborne and Gardiner which will make them better. They should also get good goaltending. The point is that they’ve generated some momentum with their moves and made them to fill their holes and play their style. Conversely, the Habs added an aging Briere, George Parros and an extremely limited Douglas Murray. Montreal still has a good team, but they didn’t really add much to it so I’m curious to see how the contrast in off seasons plays out.
12. Also, the news of Emelin being out until at least Christmas is massive. He was a force on the Habs defense last year and when he was out they looked noticeably softer and their defense really missed his presence. Douglas Murray does nothing to replace him, either. For Montreal’s sake Tinordi better be ready for full-time duty.
13. Last year Carolina had a lot of hype then obviously struggled as a lot of things went wrong. Their defense is still weak, but Sekera helps them as he joins Faulk and Gleason as legit top four defensemen on the team. Ward obviously needs to stay healthy but a healthy Tuomo Ruutu makes a difference and if they sign Brendan Morrow as rumoured, they might even have some depth at forward. I think they will start living up to their promise a bit this year.
14. I remember when the Isles were mocked for promoting Jack Capuano (who the hell is that?!?! Was the general consensus) but man what a job he’s done. Besides the actual team success, how about getting veterans Nabokov and Visnovsky to not only buy into the program but sign extensions, when both vehemently tried to fight going there? He might be the most underrated coach in the league right now.
15. On the note of underrated, I was trying to think of some under the radar media members or bloggers worth reading regularly and kind of blanked. Would appreciate some names or links that are worth checking out beyond the obvious ones.