High Hopes

• Watching hockey in HD is really, really nice. It’s noticeably easier to follow the puck on the ice and while Whippy Whipperson and the rest of the camera crew at FSN Bay Area still move the cameras too much (versus changing angles on the play), the blur effect when a fast pass opens a breakaway is lessened by the improved camera equipment which helps catch up with the play faster. It’s still not as good as actually being at the game, but it’s a lot closer than the usual squint-and-shrug activity required by regular TV.
• Marty McBorely is terrible. I miss Drew Remenda already. Sample “commentary” from last night after the Sharks took a second penalty twenty seconds after the first:

  Yeah, you really don’t want to go down 5-on-3 in this situation.

  Wow. Is that a fact? I’m going out on a limb here, McBorely, and saying that you never want to go down 5-on-3. If this is the kind of “insight” we’re going to get, I’m about to start muting the TV feed and listening to the radio while I watch the games.
• I was pretty impressed with the play of Mike Grier and Mark Bell. Of course Bell scored on a pretty, pretty play by Cheechoo (in a relatively rare assist role) but the point is, he actually buried it. If that was still Ekman over there, 50-50 chance that he sails it right over the empty net.
• What’s up with the new kid, Marc-Edouard Vlasic? He looked positively terrified out there. I mean, he played okay but that guy looks like he’s about 11 years old. Still, you gotta respect the kid for trying. His official nickname for the season (as dubbed by Gin): Pickle.
• I was quite unhappy with Toskala’s play all night. I felt like the game really should have been a 4-2 regulation win for the Sharks. The only time he really looked sharp was late in the second period when they were down two men and the D had been out there for approximately nine minutes without a line change and couldn’t clear the zone. But especially that second goal: You don’t let that in. Not if you want to be starting goalie for my team.
• How crazy was Cheechoo punching a hole in the boards with his skate? Like McBorely pointed out, it’s always scary to see a guy go hard feet-first into the boards (brings memories of Marco Sturm a few seasons back) but if he’s just going to kick out the boards (in practically a perfect circle!?)… well… what? And what really killed me was that it took them like twenty minutes to fix it. For all the work they did I was expecting something that looked like it had never been broken at all. Instead they screwed a piece of plywood into the back of the boards. Look, I’m no carpenter or handyman or anything, but what was the holdup there?
• Speaking of holdups, that was about the longest game ever. Right after the broken boards incident they paused for a good ten minutes to review (and ultimately make the wrong call) a Sharks goal. You know one thing that I like from the NFL that I wish pro hockey would implement is that when a call is challenged or goes to booth review in the NHL the ref gets on the loudspeaker and explains what it is that was challenged and what they’re going to review. Then when it is done being reviewed, the ref gets back out there and explains why the call was made the way it was. That, I think, can do a lot to put a fan’s mind at ease because from where I sat the puck was clearly across the goal line (myabe they didn’t have HD?) and the live audio feed indicated that it was so well before the whistle blew (which blew way early, too, by the by). The only thing was that the puck wasn’t completely visible before the whistle blew, and the goalie’s leg moved to reveal the puck location just after the whistle so even though you could tell that the puck didn’t move at all before or after the goalie’s leg got out of the way, I could at least buy an explanation that there was insufficient evidence to overturn the call on the ice. Although, the call on the ice was for a review which I think is a major cop-out. In my opinion, if the ref can’t tell on the ice which way to make the call and wants to go to the booth for review without an official on-ice call, then there should be no need for undeniable proof one way or the other since nothing stands to be overturned. In that case it should just be whatever it looks like happened. If that was the case they would have given the Sharks the goal, I’m pretty sure. But as it was they retroactively decided the call was “no goal” so the evidence had to be incontrovertible.
• The 2006 Sharks Team Preview on Yahoo! notes that McLaren is an overrated defenseman because he doesn’t have much offensive power. I concede that his offensive skills are mediocre at best (that’s why we got Carle) but his defensive skills are among the best on the team, maybe second to Scott Hannan. What drives me nuts about McLaren is that during the playoffs the guy is such a difference maker because he absolutely punishes anyone who steps near him with the puck. But during the regular season (and it started already last night) he acts like a little puppy who wants to lick everyone’s faces instead of throwing some checks around. It’s annoying (but don’t even get HB started about it).

Page 2 of 3 | Previous page | Next page