I gotta write about tonight’s game, though. First off, I’d just like to get something out of the way really quickly. Some of you may have noticed I participated in a roundtable over at Canucks Corner. In that roundtable, I made a couple of predictions. Regarding the Canucks, this is what I wrote on April 14th (scroll down to 8:47 or so):

“Canucks in 6. Luongo will have 1 bad game but look solid throughout the rest. Sedins and Samuelsson lead the way offensively.”

Let’s see.

Luongo had 1 bad game (and was pulled) and looked solid throughout the rest.

Samuelsson leads the Canucks offense and leads the NHL in goals scored and is looking like a (VERY EARLY) Conn Smythe candidate (then again, so is Sidney Crosby.)

Daniel is third in NHL points, fifth for assists and second for the Canucks.

Henrik is third in scoring for the Canucks and third in assists.

To be fair, I did predict Jonathan Bernier was going to step up, which didn’t happen. But Quick did falter.

I also wrote,

“I also think hockey poolies are going to be frustrated with Frolov.”

1g, his only point in the entire series. I know he’s young and it was his first time, but jeez, you had a worse outing than Ladislav Nagy had against the Canucks in the 06/07 playoffs (1g,1a) and that was a low scoring affair. Pretty weaksauce!

So, let this be a lesson to anyone who may happen to work for a West Coast hockey team and may just so happen to besmirching my good name. I CAN use my powers for good. Anywho…

I had been saying for a while I was willing to be patient with Luongo and his play. I pointed to the Olympics and also said that sometimes, goalies just happen to go through slumps. I wanted to see if he’d show up for the playoffs. I loved the big goalline save he made in Game 1 (helped in part by Michal Handzus being a dummy and celebrating early, mind) but did Luongo ever show up tonight. Several Mount Olympus sized saves and a compete level that would have Al Pacino’s character from Any Given Sunday drooling in envy.

A great game, for the most part. While it’s frustrating that Burrows and Raymond didn’t have a fantastic series, I’d like to think that it’s in part due to the relative size of the Kings in comparison to them. Both of them are in the 6′0-6′1″ and 185-188 lbs range while the Kings have numerous players over 6′3″ (Handzus and Modin are both 6′4″) and are on the heavier side of the scale. I don’t think it’s a coincidence that Samuelsson, who is 6′2″ and 218, enjoyed more success on the Sedin line than Burrows did.

It’ll be interesting to see how Burrows and Raymond come out against likely second round opponents Chicago, who have forwards and play a game that are more suited to Burrows and Raymond.

I also spoke about Alberts. Injuries had him back in the lineup and I thought he played a lot better and actually had some big clears on the penalty kill, too. That said, his misplay with the puck resulted in Luongo’s The Save and it looks like Alain Vigneault was none too pleased with his antics, as he got only seconds of icetime in the third. I’ve said before it may have just been a matter of adjusting to systems play and getting rid of bad habits with Alberts and he seems to be getting better as time goes on. Very interested in seeing him next season.

Beyond that, I’m loving both Steve Bernier and Shane O’Brien’s play in the postseason. SOB has been asserting himself well for the most part. His ‘Are you not entertained?!’ bit on Friday was a little much in the eyes of some, but it’s the playoffs. You gotta completely throttle your opponent.

Bernier’s just been playing a simple game, capitalizing on his chances, and playing a sound defensive game. Glad he’s picked the right time to start contributing.

I’ll have more on the second round once their opponent is confirmed (probably Chicago!) Also, looks like the Canucks are going to be set to play on Thursday, so keep your schedule open!

I love the playoffs because nothing, absolutely nothing, matches the excitement of watching live sports. The only thing that I think comes close is the atmosphere that comes with the World Cup. World Series? Yawn. Super Bowl? No thanks. I’ll stick with the Stanley Cup playoffs, thanks.

I hate it because, hey, I cheer for the Canucks. The playoffs are not a time where you can be happy and joyful: cheering for Vancouver has more than enough heartbreak. Just as there are great playoff highs, like Morrison’s OT winner in the ‘04 playoffs, the ‘94 playoffs in their entirety or Games 1 and 2 from the ‘02 playoffs. There’s the heartbreaker moments, as well, like Game 7 of the ‘04 playoffs, Nathan Lafayette’s post clanking shot in ‘94 and Game 3 from the ‘02 playoffs.

Tonight’s game almost fell into the latter category. I don’t recall being this worried in a hockey game since the aforementioned Calgary series. Amazing tone to this game that had me worried until the very end, as the Canucks looked to be unable to extract themselves from the mess they had found themselves mired in.

With the Kings running roughshod over the Canucks it looked as though the Canucks were done and that Game 5 in Vancouver was going to be a mere formality.

There were plenty of reasons you could’ve used to explain why the Canucks should have and were going to lose this game besides typical Canucks fan neurosis: Alain Vigneault electing for the second consecutive off day to hold an optional practice letting the team’s woeful penalty kill continue to fester, Shane O’Brien losing his mind and beaking off at assistant coach Rick Bowness could’ve opened the floodgates for the Canucks to break down and play stupid, undisciplined hockey, the Sedins continuing to look ineffective against the Kings.

I was honestly worried about the lack of practice on the penalty kill and I think tonight’s game should vindicate me in thinking so: Vigneault stated that there was some video work done in lieu of on ice practice and I think that the Canucks did take to it as the game went on: they actually killed back to back penalties and I think they may have done better adjusting had there been a practice. I know what I sound like here, but I think that the lack of working on an off-day nearly cost the Canucks the game here.

The other big concern I had going out of Game 3 were the Sedins and boy, did they deliver tonight. I wrote last game that I thought they may have been getting a little too fancy, a little too cute and it was allowing the Kings to effectively crowd them out and render them ineffective. Tonight, I thought they played a much better, and less fancy game. What do I mean?

Well, Samuelsson’s tying goal was a good example of this. Gain the zone, simple pass to an open man not trying to force things, another pass back to the blueline to Daniel, get bodies in front of Quick, slide it laterally to O’Brien and then back to Daniel, shoot, redirect. It was far simpler than what the Sedins were attempting last game and unsurprisingly, it worked!

Henrik’s game winning goal was another good example of not getting too fancy out there. Simple offensive rush, Henrik has the option to pass to Burrows, risking Doughty picking off the pass. Instead, he shoots and scores.

I also thought that Luongo’s performance was looking a lot better than the prrevious game. While yes, he did allow 4 goals, none of them were stinkers like Ryan Smyth’s goal from Game 3 and there were no ’staring at the puck’ instances, again like in Game 3. I think Luongo continued to gain confidence as the game went on, culminating in his game changing save against Frolov. Not a statistically great game from Luongo, but he was part of that penalty kill that killed 2 in a row off (yes, I realize how ridiculous it is to be making such a big deal out of that) and had several huge saves that kept the Canucks in the game. So good game from Luongo.

The only other major issue and something I didn’t really think about when discussing the Sedins last game was that Burrows looks completely snake bitten out there. Greg Wyshynski from Yahoo’s Puck Daddy pointed out that Burrows looked spooked while Jim Hughson noted that Burrows hasn’t scored a goal in 9 consecutive games. I did mention that he had been bad on the penalty kill, but didn’t stop to think about his play offensively. Bad time to have a slump, but I think he was starting to rebound after Alain Vigneault bounced him off the Sedin line. Hopefully he’ll start to pick it up, as the Canucks PK woes aren’t over yet.

Game 5 is Friday, back at home for the Canucks!

Finally, I’ll close things off on this note:

The first, clearly, obviously, is the penalty kill. Allowing three straight goals on essentially the same plays is problematic, regardless of this the preseason, regular season or postseason. More worrying is the fact that the bulk of these goals came with the Canucks top penalty killing unit out on the ice. People can start pining for Ryan Johnson all they want, but the problems transcend any sort of contribution he could be making on the penalty kill. Kesler and Burrows are supposedly the Canucks best guys on the penalty kill and they were on the ice for 2 goals against, Burrows was on for 3.

Prior to tonight, Kesler and Burrows were on for 1 PP goal against in Game 1 and the game winner in overtime in Game 2. Including the 3 goals scored tonight on the man advantage, Burrows and Kesler have been on the ice for 5 goals against, all within 30-4o seconds of the penalty kill starting. Not a good number when the number of games played is 3.

Something needs to be done with the Canucks penalty kill. Whether it’s a matter of blocking shots or being less passive (seems to me that the Canucks are collapsing in on Luongo far too readily and aren’t clogging up passing/shooting lanes enough) the Canucks penalty kill needs to be readjusted to address the Kings and their approach to the man advantage.

I’d also argue that Luongo, while he has made some timely saves and has looked a lot better than he did in the regular season, needs to step it up and play better on the penalty kill. That one goal where he sort of blankly looked at the puck for a second before trying to glove it was heartwrenching, as though it were a sign of things to come. As Alain Vigneault said post-game, your best players need to be your best players.

The second thing that needs to be looked at in the face of tonight’s loss is how effectively the Kings are shutting down the Sedins. I thought that they looked good in Game 1 and 2 (despite no points in the second game) but tonight’s game was a continuation of the Kings efforts to basically crowd out the Sedins and their game. It’s clear that the Kings have been directed to lay into the twins at every opportunity and that they need to be aggressive with getting their sticks in the way of oncoming pucks to shut down their cycle game. I’d say the Canucks need to either start directing more shots from the point on net (shots on net, of course, being the rub) or find another way to stop the Kings from getting all up in their grills. No idea how they’ll be able to do that, as the Kings have been doing a great job of dictating the pace so far.

The third thing that needs to be looked at is the officiating. Now, I’m not looking to say that there’s a conspiracy. That’s rubbish. I was talking to @mlse over on Twitter and he made the point that the NHL is too inept to ever be capable of working out a conspiracy. I’d be inclined to agree. That said, I think that this series has been marred by bad officiating. Unfortunately, there isn’t a whole lot that the Canucks can do about it besides sucking it up. It’s frustrating, with the Henrik Sedin stick in the visor, the too many men call, an incredibly blatant holding the stick non-call against Bernier tonight as well as the ‘no goal’ call there are a lot of things Canucks fans can be complaining about.

Unfortunately, these blown calls don’t fix the PP nor do they get the Sedins producing. Canucks need to take a look at themselves and address those internal problems before they start looking outwards.

Normally if a goalie makes 50 stops, you’d figure that they won the game after putting up such an impressive performance.

Not the case tonight for Roberto Luongo, who may felt like he was back in Florida playing for the Panthers. It was in Florida, you’ll recall, that Luongo set a dubious record for most shots faced in a single NHL season. The fact that the Canucks defense was having, and this is putting it charitably, an off-night must’ve had him thinking he had fallen asleep in a hot tub and gone back in time.

It’s funny. Shortly after praising Kevin Bieksa’s improved play since coming back from injury he had an awful gaffe that led to Todd Bertuzzi’s slump busting goal that opened the door up for Detroit’s offense. Stumbling around in the crease, not bothering to look down for a good 2 seconds or so was brutal. Not sure if it was in a blind spot or what, but that was a horrific goal.

Equally bad was the goal given up just a scant 5 seconds later, setting team records for both the Canucks and Red Wings. Although it’s tempting to rake Luongo over the coals for Datsyuk’s goal, I don’t think it was necessarily his fault. That sort of save was a really tough one to make and Salo’s stick getting in the way there made it even harder for Luongo to make the stop. Nevermind that Luongo was still mad at himself for the previous goal and hadn’t yet gotten back into the game.

Christian Ehrhoff also had a bit of a miscue when, being without a stick in the dying seconds of overtime, he pretty much gave Zetterberg free reign to do whatever he wanted. It’s been said that there are opportunities where it’s forgivable to take a penalty. With roughly 2 seconds left in the game, I’d argue that would be one of those instances. Ehrhoff wasn’t aware of the time left (I’d argue that even with 5-6 seconds remaining the Canucks would have been fine) and it ended up costing the Canucks a point in the standings. An important point, if they were hoping to move past third overall in the Western Conference and make a push for second or first overall.

More frustrating to me, though, was the performance of some of the Canucks forwards. I’ve been happy with Demitra since he came back with injury, arguing that he needed to get into the groove or pointing out his play right after the Olympics. Unfortunately, there’s not a whole lot to be defending from Pavol’s performance last night. He looked ineffectual and out of place for most of the game, running into opponents and making questionable decisions while playing. I’d even go so far to say as it was probably Demitra’s worst game of the season (small sample size, I know, but still.) I don’t know what’s going on here, but it’s frustrating.

Even worse would have been a potential linemate replacement with Mason Raymond. Since being demoted to the third line, I haven’t really noticed Raymond on the ice all that much. The most noticeable player on that line has been Kyle Wellwood and, to a lesser extent, Jannik Hansen. There was a great feed from Hansen in the second period to Wellwood, for example, in addition to Wellwood playing, well, like a man possessed. I’d like to see him get bumped back up to play with Kesler and Grabner, as that line was clicking and if there’s ever a team to beat up on in the NHL for the Canucks, it’d be the Edmonton Oilers.

I’m also getting a little worried about the Sedins. I thought Daniel looked great, but Henrik looked almost timid out there tonight. Haven’t heard anything regarding Henrik’s back, which was an issue going into the Olympics, but I’m really not looking forward to hearing that Henrik was playing with a sore back if the Canucks end up taking an early exit from the playoffs. Burrows also looked quiet for a lot of tonight, but I’ll attribute that to Detroit’s gameplan: it seemed as though they were actively seeking him out and focusing on him. Not sure if that’s the most effective strategy for playing against the Sedins, but it worked, as they were kept quiet for most of the night.

Sad stat of the day: Canucks have lost every game in which Shane O’Brien has managed to score a goal. Granted, it’s only been three games (this game, a tilt against the Blues and game 6 against Chicago) but still.

Canucks square off Tuesday against the Edmonton Oilers. Hopefully they learned their lesson from last Tuesday and will come prepared to play a full 60 minutes!

I know, I’m late. Furthermore, I’m like two weeks behind with the Week That Was. Unfortunately, paid work trumps unpaid work.

I’m going to do a 2 in 1, sort of, for this, considering I missed blogging the Sens game as well. (That sound you hear? Google Analytics dying of crib death…) I thought this was probably one of the best games, top to bottom, from the Canucks in a long time. Kevin Bieksa looked good coming back in his first game since his calf was sliced and diced, Luongo was in fine form and just about everyone was doing their job. Even guys like Ryan Johnson.

That solid play continued into Sunday’s game against the Flames. Who would’ve thought the Canucks could’ve earned 4 points in the standings off of only 20 minutes of work? The first period against Calgary should be preserved and used for future generations of how to play hockey. I couldn’t believe how flawless the Canucks were looking in the opening frame. I know, I sound horribly homertastic, but man, literally everything was going the Canucks way. I mentioned over on Twitter during the game that the bounces were working out for the Canucks, too. It wasn’t just that bounces were in favor, but they were seemingly going right onto the sticks of the boys wearing the Orca. Sort of ridiculous, but the end result was a 3-0 lead and Mikka Kiprusoff being chased to start the second period.

From there on, though, it was mostly the Flames who were in the driver’s seat as they started to take over and dictate the pace of the game. Understandable, as the Canucks had just come off a 6 game road trip (sorry, but the Olympic break counts here) and were playing the second game of a back to back. Had the Flames not came out so flat in the first frame, it could’ve been a completely different result on the scoresheet.

Well, the first period effort and Luongo. It looks like it’s the long awaited start of Luongo getting ‘in the zone’ as even Sportsnet West play by play man, Peter Loubardias, who generally is not very good at calling the action on the ice, recognized this. Luongo looked sharp, which was a nice change of pace from the Luongo we had on the road: he of the giving up the first goal and getting subsequently yanked. So yes, Luongo put together a fantastic two games, although he was really only challenged in the second and third periods of the Calgary game.

I was also pleasantly surprised with Ryan Johnson’s play as of late. I thought he looked good in Ottawa (although from about halfways through the second onwards I was distracted) and he continued his, and I can’t believe I’m saying this, solid play against Calgary. Jannik Hansen also looked really good over the weekend and played probably his best hockey in the past 2 seasons he’s been on the Canucks. I also liked that he was mixing it up with the opposition, too. Following the Moose, I know he likes to chirp and get under the skin of opponents so glad to see him continue that trend.

Glad the Sedins have woken back up, too. I know that they were still producing while they were on their goalless drought, but it’s nice to see them out there controlling the play and being up to their usual troublesome selves. Perfect timing, too: Ovechkin is potentially facing a suspension for his hit on Chicago’s Brian Campbell and Henrik is 3 points behind him in what’s shaping up to be the NHL version of Catch Me If You Can. Can Hank make like Tom Hanks and chase down Ovi?

Beyond that, I hope to God Salo continues to stay healthy as he’s been a rock for the Canucks lately. Loved his diving into the net and playing goalie against Calgary last night. Anyone who saw the play knows what I’m talking about. Alberts also continues to intrigue me: I love the fact that he’s strong and not afraid to toss opposing players around. I’m also surprised that for being a defensive defenseman, Alberts sure likes jumping up into the play and pinching whenever it suits him. Surprising because he’s such a big guy you don’t expect him to be able to get back and into position so quickly but that’s exactly what he’s doing. Give him a little more time on the roster and I think folks are going to be really happy with him.

No idea where Mason Raymond’s been as of late, but it’d be great if he can make his way onto the Canucks roster, as I haven’t seen him in a while. What do you mean, he’s been playing? Seriously? Ugh. The second half of this season has been brutal for you, MayRay.

Canucks are going to continue their homestand with a game against Tavares and the Islanders Tuesday. The best part about that game? I’ll be catching it LIVE at GM Place!

Bret Hart once said, who are you to doubt El Dandy?

I guess it’s my turn to say, who are you to doubt the Canucks?

You’d think I’d have learned, considering the Canucks have fought back and won an incredible 9 times this season after going down. Well, tonight’s game marked effort number 10 from the ‘Cardiac Canucks’ who I think can officially be crowned the Team That Doesn’t Die. While I’m not a fan of the Canucks surrendering early goal leads (and I don’t think I ever will) I AM a huge fan of the Canucks never giving up, not looking deflated after a crap goal, not having to rely on Luongo to bail them out night after night after night.

And yeah, as I’ve said in prior post-game writeups, Luongo hasn’t been looking good. Whether it’s been surrendering goals on the first shot like he was earlier in the season or these early first period meltdowns, this NHL regular season probably isn’t up there on Luongo’s all time best.

All that being said, though, I think Canucks fans should be reminded how nice it is to have a goalie who is still capable of keeping his team in the game and capable of making a comeback like they did tonight. Luongo did let in some bad goals and put the Canucks down early, but he also made some key saves, including a wonderful pad save as well as an amazing glove save on Matt Duchene in the third period. It’s a far cry from the Dan Cloutier meltdowns of old where there was literally no chance in hell of the Canucks being able to battle back and tie the game, let alone win the game. I think I can recall ONE game where the Canucks managed to do that during the ‘Cloutier era’ and I want to say that was against Washington and Johan Hedberg was in net…but I might be mixing my Canucks history up on me.

Bottom line, Luongo hasn’t been playing his best hockey as of late, but he’s still been capable of making key saves. He can be better and it’s simply a matter of time before he turns it all around.

And man, if there were ever any doubts that Mikael Samuelsson should have been on the Swedish Olympic team and Mattias Weinhandl should’ve been left to rot on an ice floe somewhere in the Arctic, they should be all but gone after tonight’s effort. Samuelsson wound up getting a hat trick and an assist on the night in his first full game with the Sedins in ages. Although some people were upset with Burrows being taken off of the Sedins line I wasn’t too bothered by it: Trois Kronors had been ineffectual for about 10 games and AV needed to mix things up a bit. Burrows wound up with his 30th goal of the season, although the Demitra/Kesler/Burrows line wasn’t exactly lighting the world on fire. I’d give them a few more games as a line before throwing in the towel or panicking over them.

The one guy I’d like to know is still alive is Mason Raymond. The only time he really stood out last night was after a pretty brutal giveaway that resulted in the fourth goal scored against the Canucks. After that, he was benched for a while before being thrown out with the likes of Ryan Johnson and Rick Rypien. Ever since that hat trick against the Flames he’s been mostly snake bitten.

Canucks play the Phoenix Coyotes tomorrow on the final game of their road trip before coming home to GM Place. Andrew Raycroft is expected to start!

Let’s get one thing out of the way really quickly: I think Martin Brodeur is an excellent goaltender, arguably one of the greatest of all time. I believe he ‘earned’ the right to start against the United States on Super Sunday: his credentials, along with a strong performance against Switzerland paved the way for Brodeur to start.

This blog post isn’t about Martin Brodeur. What it is about, though, is Damien Cox and his love affair with Martin Brodeur and the subsequent behavior that sprung out of said affair.

Ladies and gentlemen, Mr. Damien Cox.

Why am I writing about him? Well, it stems from some comments Cox made on Twitter and in print in the wake of Canada’s loss to the Americans on Sunday. He doesn’t think that Martin Brodeur was handled properly and that Roberto Luongo shouldn’t be getting the start.

No, seriously. He flat out said he’s ‘not a fan of Luongo.’

This is all well and good. Everyone has opinions regarding Team Canada. Stamkos should be on! Pronger should be off! Start Fleury! Etc. Were it just Damien Cox voicing his opinion, that would be fine and expected for someone like him.

It becomes a problem, though, when someone like Cox has co-written Martin Brodeur’s autobiography and goes off on a childish rant in defense of his professional accquaintance.

I think that Cox himself knows that, as he penned a missive to his critics yesterday. They included folks like Jason Botchford, of the Vancouver Province, who merely Tweeted ‘It’s worth noting today that Damien Cox wrote Martin Brodeur’s autobiography.’ William Houston, a former Globe and Mail writer, also chimed in on Cox’s defense of Brodeur, suggesting ‘maybe Cox has a man crush on Brodeur’ before pointing out that Brodeur played badly against the Americans. This is in addition to the hordes of idiots (myself included!) who Tweeted at Cox regarding his words.

It’s pretty unusual for a journalist to address his detractors: writing for the public means you’ll always have people disagreeing with you and if you spent your time arguing with them you’d never get anything else done. Cox argued that the debate about the goalies is more interesting than his reasons. Fair enough, but when you overreact to a goaltending decision the way Cox did, you have to wonder where he is coming from. Especially when you don’t directly address your fellow scribes who are taking the time to criticize you, something which Cox has done in the past.

Am I being ridiculous here? Well, here is the total sum of what Cox had to say about Brodeur’s goaltending in the American game:

‘Against the U.S., however, Crosby and Brodeur both had games that won’t make it into their home highlight reels.’

No mention of the weird baseball swing Brodeur made that directly led to a goal against. No mention of his decision to try and engage in a shoving match with an American player instead of trying to play the puck, a decision which led to the game winning goal for Team USA. Both noteworthy, game changing events, both totally possible talking points.

Conversely, here is what Cox had to say about Luongo, who didn’t play a single second in Canada’s loss to the States:

‘The expectation in many corners is that Roberto Luongo will get the nod in goal against the Germans.

The problem with that is, assuming Canada wins, sticking with Luongo would make sense even though all he’d have on his resumé would wins over Norway and Germany going into a do-or-die match with Ovechkin and Co.

“That’s not my call, buddy,” Luongo said when asked whether he believed he would start. “I’m here for Team Canada. I’m not here for Roberto Luongo.”‘

Seems a little out of whack. Heck, Cox devoted more space to talking about Alexander Ovechkin, who plays on Russia, for those unawares, than he did Brodeur.

But things got really weird on Monday. Cox penned one article, saying the move to make Luongo the starter was a bad decision. He claimed that Brodeur feels he was ‘blamed unfairly’ and ‘undoubtedly disrespected’ by Mike Babcock. Did you notice that there were no direct quotes in that link? It’s because Cox was speculating, yet dressed it up as though he knew what precisely was on Brodeur’s mind.

Radio broadcaster Greg Brady, who co-hosts the Bill Watters show on AM 640 in Toronto, noted this. He also brought it up in an interview (select ‘Damien Cox’ from the menu) that he conducted with Cox yesterday. When asked if he had spoke with Brodeur he got really evasive and tried to deflect the question, saying Brodeur is ‘classy’ before finally saying no, that he hadn’t while claiming ‘I know that’s how he feels.’

Cox then went on in his article making comments that Luongo is a choker and essentially piled on him. Again, no real mention of Brodeur’s play or why Mike Babcock might be making this decision. Readers were left to speculate as to why Mean Mike Babcock is picking on Marty.

Then, Cox penned another article, talking about the ‘great debate’ surrounding Canada’s goaltending.  He begins by criticizing Luongo’s butterfly style and how Team Canada will have to ‘adjust’ to him. Still no mention of what could have possibly led to Babcock’s decision to sit Brodeur.

He then turns his attention to Babcock, saying that he should be ‘roasted on the spit of Canadian hockey opinion’ if his decision to start Luongo is the wrong one. Yes, even if Russia suffocates Canada’s offense and they lose 1-0, it’ll be Babcock and Luongo’s fault.

So, that makes 3 full articles published by the Star and one radio interview discussing how Cox feels about Brodeur, with the only criticisms levelled at Luongo being the quoted piece I listed above, with the rest being an all out attack on Luongo and Babcock.

Overkill? Apparently not, as Cox also felt the need to white knight for Brodeur on Twitter. His response to folks being critical of Marty? They don’t understand the game of hockey.

So, yes, I think that Cox went way overboard in his defense of Brodeur. I also think highlighting the fact that he wrote a book with Brodeur to be an important detail that would explain what other journalists (Botchford, Houston and Brady) took notice of.

I think that Cox’s defense of Brodeur also extends to how he treats other subjects. Take Brian Burke. Cox rarely has nice things to say about the Canucks, even on a good day. There were his comments about Burrows and Auger, but he’s also taken snipes at the Canucks for signing Sundin and the Canucks past history, all the while claiming that Toronto doesn’t care about Vancouver or the Canucks at all. He also said that the 1994 Canucks were an ‘inconsistent team that lacks chemistry’ way back in April of ‘94.

Things got really ugly in 2004. That was the year when Todd Bertuzzi tried to take Steve Moore’s head off. Cox had a field day with it, rightfully decrying Bertuzzi’s actions and going on and on about fighting and ‘the Code’ and everything else. Funnily enough, Cox also had a personal connection to the Moore/Bertuzzi incident, as he had met Moore years ago. No, I’m not implying that Cox wrote about Moore because he met him, it’s just an observation.

Anyway, Cox had lots and lots of things to say about Bertuzzi. He also had things to say about former Canucks coach Marc Crawford, saying he was ’smirking’ as events unfolded on the ice. Oh yeah, and he also had something to say about former Canucks GM Brian Burke, who he described as ‘overcaffeinated’ and that Burke was running ‘an emotional, aggressive team’ insinuating that he had a part in what happened with Moore.  Cox also gave Burke grief for comments he made about Moore’s health, saying ‘It’s hard to forget in the days immediately following the incident, for example, hearing Burke dismiss the severity of Moore’s injuries and claim that he’d be back playing in a matter of days.’

Interestingly, despite making a point of tying Burke to Bertuzzi, Cox’s recent ruminations on Brian Burke have been nothing but rosy recently. I wonder what could have possibly changed his opinion on things?

Despite blasting Burke for having an ‘emotional, aggressive team’ with the Canucks, Cox talked about those same qualities in glowing terms with regards to the Leafs, talking about the fighting majors of the Anaheim Ducks (Burke’s previous team.) In an article on the eve of Burke signing with the Leafs, nary a negative word was found about Burke and zero mention of Moore was made.

It should be noted that Burke has been known to be adversarial with the media and has refused to accomodate some media types. The most notable being flaps he had with Vancouver radio broadcaster David Pratt and Vancouver journalist Tony Gallagher. Not saying that the two are related, but, well, you have to wonder why there is no mention of Bertuzzi/Moore in relation to Burke on the eve of his becoming GM of the NHL’s biggest club, considering it was one of the most high profile incidents he’d ever been involved in.

The amount of fawning Cox has done over Burke now that he’s the Leafs GM is comical. Take this article, from last year.  The Bertuzzi Incident? Burke had ‘lived through’ as though he were a modern day Job. He praises Burke for making the Leafs ‘destined to be one of the NHL’s goonier teams, a club dominated by North American talent and muscle’, aspects which he found deplorable with the Canucks.

Could Cox have changed his tune when Burke became Leafs GM? Could this be another instance of Cox showing preferential treatment due to his relationship with a subject? They’re good questions, for sure.

Finally, let’s talk about Roberto Luongo. Cox’s opinions on Luongo have also shifted and swayed. Last night on Twitter he was outright hostile, commenting twice about Luongo ‘flopping around.’ Amazing how focused Cox gets on goaltending when it doesn’t involve Brodeur.

But let’s look at things a little more indepth. In November of 2008, Cox wrote that ‘even after winning another Vezina last season, he was going to have to play well this season’ and pointed out that Brodeur’s injury woes has put in doubt that Brodeur would be an automatic decision for Canada’s #1.

Over 3 years ago, Cox wrote that Luongo was ‘a player who could handle major expectations as he’d done while playing for Canada at world championship tournaments.’

In April of last year, Cox noted that this was Luongo’s chance to ‘knock out the champ’ (Brodeur) when talking about the Olympic starting seat. Cox also mentioned ‘much the same was said last fall when Brodeur went down with a torn bicep’ neglecting to inform anyone that it was he who was saying that. Also of note in that article was that this wasn’t the first time Luongo has gone in relief of Brodeur: in 2004 Luongo ‘rescued’ Team Canada with a 37 save OT effort at the World Cup when Brodeur was out with an injured hand.

So, Luongo finally has a chance to shine. To wrest the ‘throne’ away from Brodeur. Cox did a great job of talking it up over the past 2 years, only now that the moment is here, he’s pitching a huge fit. He will not go quiet into the night. What happened?

My guess? Cox knew that there was very little chance that Luongo (or anyone else, for that matter) was going to be anointed as the #1 goalie for Canada for the 2010 Olympics over Brodeur. As a result, he could safely speculate away, knowing that Brodeur’s job was safe. Then, when things got ugly and Brodeur’s job actually was in jeopardy did Cox’s true colors emerge and we got three over-the-top articles defending Brodeur’s honor, a radio interview and some nonsense on Twitter.

I also think that Cox is not above acting unprofessionally, which is how I view his white knighting of Brodeur. It wouldn’t be a first for him, either, as there was his Tweet which cut down former Islanders VP Chris Botta, saying: ‘beware outta work P.R. guys scratching and blogging, pretending to be journalists.’ I don’t know what sort of personal disagreement exists between Botta and Cox, but it’s yet another example of Cox’s personal biases and emotions leaking into the material he presents to the public in a gross, ugly fashion.

So, no, Damien Cox, I have to disagree. I do think your affiliation with Martin Brodeur is of importance, given the size of your reaction and the rapid 180 you’ve made on Roberto Luongo as goalie of Team Canada. I also think that this isn’t out of the character for you, as based on your reversal in opinion on Brian Burke once he became GM of the Leafs.

No one is begrudging you your opinion in the Luongo/Brodeur ‘debate’, but what people are questioning is your motivations for doing so. The lack of criticism on Brodeur’s play, while piling it on thick for any of Marty’s detractors, coach Mike Babcock and Roberto Luongo also speak to this.

Perhaps if you had given some consideration to both Brodeur’s positives and negatives when evaluating him folks wouldn’t feel this way.

I guess you could say that I called this game. Literally.

You had to know the Canucks were looking to avenge a rather ugly loss to the Tampa Bay Lightning. Roberto Luongo was overdue for a shutout and the Sedins/Burrows couldn’t be held off the scoresheet forever. Going up against a team that was short a few men (Nathan Horton was out due to injury and Dominic Moore had just been traded to Montreal) and really only had Tomas Vokoun going for them and you sort of figured that the Canucks had to win this game.
Now, before I anoint myself the next Carnac the Magnificent I’d like to say that this is probably more a case of a blind squirrel finding a nut than anything else. I mean, I was expecting a Canucks win, but I wasn’t necessarily expecting Luongo to get a shutout or for Jannik Hansen to score a shorthanded goal. I may have been right with my prediction, but no way will I take credit for everything!

It didn’t hurt that Luongo got some help from a goalie’s best friend, the goalposts. The Panthers came close a number of times…the rough count over on the Canucks Live Blog was 6 instances of banging the pipes. I imagine that the Florida goalposts will soon be joining The Chair in the Canucks Inanimate Objects All Time Roster sooner rather than later. Sometimes you just need that puck luck to happen for you and tonight, it was on the side of the Canucks.

Shane O’Brien was looking more like his old self, notching 6 minutes of penalties. Thankfully, so was Christian Ehrhoff, who made a great goalline save to preserve the shutout for Luongo. Brad Lukowich also looked a lot better, as did Aaron Rome, who played a rather invisible game.

It’s hard to be giving credit to the Canucks third line as, yes, they were generating some scoring chances, but no, they weren’t able to translate them into anything tangible on the scoresheet. I mean, I’d rather see the third line buzzing in the offensive zone, but I’d much rather see them scoring goals rather than just carrying the play. It’s gotta be frustrating for them. Good on them for looking a LOT better than they did against Tampa, but not looking much better than they have all year. Damning with faint praise, here.

I was also skeptical about seeing Hansen draw back into the lineup. Not that I didn’t think he deserved to be getting the icetime, bur that I didn’t think his impact on the team would be so great. He’s only played twice but he’s looked good thus far and that SHG was very nice indeed. Going back to my post about the bottom six, I’d like to see Pettinger brought up to replace Hordichuk. His experience and actual defensive ability would help to balance out that line and turn it into something respectable. Keep Hordichuk around if you absolutely must have an enforcer/energy guy for games against Anaheim/Calgary, I guess.

Despite getting on the scoresheet, I thought the Sedins didn’t look particularly interested in tonight’s affair. I’m beginning to wonder if their thoughts are starting to turn towards the Olympics and their game is being subconsciously affected as a result. It’d explain why they seem just slightly out of sync with everything.

The one question I do have, though, is where do you slot Pavol Demitra in tomorrow. Do you scratch Wellwood? Bernier? Leave Demitra off the roster? Tough call, but it’ll be interesting to see the lineup Coach AV goes with tomorrow night.

What a fascinating game, today’s matinee affair was.

Partially because I’ve been high on cold medication all day and it took me a while to gather my thoughts, but also because this was pretty much the reverse instance of what went down with the Montreal game. The Canucks had a rather poor start (which saw the first goal being scored by the opposing team and which saw yet another early penalty leading to said goal) but were able to snatch victory from the jaws of defeat thanks to an absolutely stellar effort from Roberto Luongo, who responded well after being sat Thursday in Ottawa.

I mentioned in the Ottawa Postscript that I liked the decision to sit Luongo, as it maximized the chance to win against Boston, a team that’s been struggling as of late. A focused, rested Luongo was exactly what was needed against a Bruins team that had upstart netminder Tuuka Rask in net for them. Luongo had what was probably his best game in a LONG time, particularly in the second period where he was single handedly keeping the Canucks within one. It’s nice to see him getting hot and I hope the trend continues as the Canucks head down to Florida.

While I opted to defend Alain Vigneault’s decision to bench a player last game, I have to find fault with his decision to scratch Steve Bernier. Yes, I’m aware that he hasn’t been contributing any offense as of late, but you have to look at the other things that he brings to the table. Specifically, the fact that he’s not Tanner Glass, Darcy Hordichuk or Rick Rypien.

Look, I’ve become a fan of Tanner Glass. As a prairie boy myself, we have to stick together, and he’s been a pleasant surprise since Gillis signed him in the off-season. But he has no business playing on the third line. Especially when our fourth line is such a disaster zone as it is, having all three of Hordichuk, Glass and Rypien in the lineup is playing with fire. Don’t believe me? The two players in the box that resulted in both Boston goals were Glass and Rypien.

I’m not convinced that Jannik Hansen would be the solution to the bottom six’s woes, but he would’ve been a far better option in lieu of Glass to slot in place of Bernier. Alas, he’s down in Manitoba, so we’d have no way of knowing. Again, I don’t agree that Bernier should’ve sat in today’s game and in my eyes, it could have cost the Canucks another 2 points.

That said, I was glad to see Alain Vigneault distributing minutes to players who were having good games. For the third straight game, the Sedins looked off. I don’t know if it’s the schedule, potential flu bug (I say only because I’m under the weather myself right now and not because I’ve read anything) or just one of those things that happens to professional athletes, but AV noticed and reduced their icetime as a result. The minutes then went to players like Kesler (25:55 of icetime), Raymond (21:50) and Samuelsson (19:26.) I know we’re like almost 5 years past Marc Crawford’s time as bench boss of the Canucks, but I greatly enjoy how Vigneault holds his players accountable no matter who they are (Luongo and the benching, the Sedins and their icetime) even if I don’t always agree with it (Bernier, for example.) Far better than with Crow, where you had no real chance at seeing an increased role even if you were playing lights out.

I also find it hilarious that Alain Vigneault was getting Burrows AWAY from the Sedins as he put him alongside Raymond and Kesler as the game went on, rather than, say, putting Kesler with the Sedins. Who are the star forwards again?

Although Wellwood didn’t get as much icetime, he was being seeing some action as the Canucks tried to tie things up late in the third. I thought his play has improved as of late (not necessarily just because of that lone marker he scored against the Senators) and I’m glad that Vigneault is trusting him. He also beat Rask in the shootout, but hit the post, so all in all a good game from him.

Demitra’s starting to round into form. Don’t mind him taking some time to get into gameshape, actually, as he has missed a significant chunk of time. The Olympics should do him some good, as he should be seeing some solid icetime.

Aaron Rome’s been quietly playing some decent-to-good hockey as of late. There are the odd miscues that will go on (the Montreal game, where he was on the ice with Lukowich and the fourth line) but he’s a +3 in his last 10 games and has been a minus player in only one game (the Montreal one.) He’s not going to win the Norris any time soon, but he’s been a damn sight better than Lukowich (who I like) and Baumgartner (who I don’t particularly care for.) I’m glad he’s sticking in the lineup right now.

That about does it for my thoughts on the game. The Canucks next game is Tuesday against the Bolts. On PPV. Woo?

Hey, that’s a pretty good impersonation of a post-game Canucks fan, there Spezza!

…

Do I have to talk about the Canucks game?

Really?

Okay. There’s a lot of hating, complaining and wringing of hands going on with tonight’s loss. Oh no, we’ve lost two in a row. The end of the world is coming and the Canucks are sinking like the Titanic.

Steve Bernier’s breakway attempt was nothing short of pitiful, yes. He’s been horribly inept offensively, yes. So have Pavol Demitra and Kyle Wellwood for that matter. Unfortunately, Steve Bernier is in a really odd position with the Canucks right now.

He’s one of the few folks in our bottom six who can play a gritty game and isn’t a complete defensive liability. In tonight’s game, Bernier had 3 hits and was an even player. Going back over the last 20 games, Bernier’s been an even player. So the BIG problem, and I emphasize the word big, is that Bernier simply can’t get the puck into the net, yet the other tools he brings to the table: defensive awareness and size, are a combination that is sorely lacking in our bottom six. Darcy Hordichuk and Tanner Glass may provide grit for our bottom six, but they can’t be trusted to keep the puck out of the back of the net.

I know that some people will point to Jannik Hansen. To that, I’ve got a blog post coming regarding Hansen, a player who I actually happen to be a fan of, and the general condition of our bottom six in the near future. At this moment in time, I’m not necessarily convinced he’d be an upgrade over Bernier on the third line.

I also am somewhat bemused that folks are slagging Kyle Wellwood. In a game where the Canucks were limited to 4 shots for about half the game, you would figure that one of the big guns, like Raymond (who had a glorious chance in the first) or the Sedins would be the ones managing to get one past Brian Elliott. The fact that Kyle Wellwood came up big, virtually at the last minute, shouldn’t be a sticking point for fans. I’ve maintained that the third line has been making an effort: if they’d been stinking it up in both ends of the rink and looking uninspired I’d probably be irate. Like Bernier, Wellwood has also shown some defensive flair and it’s the lack of offense that is utterly frustrating. Unfortunately, there aren’t many options for the Canucks to replace Wellwood right now, as our depth down the middle is just as bad as our lack of competent grit in our bottom six.

The other BIG complaint from folks right now is the decision to start Andrew Raycroft. To which I have to say, Roberto Luongo probably wouldn’t have won this team the game were he in net tonight. I actually liked Alain Vigneault’s decision to rest the captain, even with the loss tonight.

Here’s why: the Canucks were going into the Corel center against a red hot Ottawa team. Luongo was going to be needing some rest somewhere on this road trip, especially after the rather dodgy performance he had against the Canadiens. The rest of the team didn’t look particularly well defensively (although the coaching staff wouldn’t admit to that) so putting Raycroft out and hoping the team would tighten up defensively didn’t look like a bad idea on paper. Unfortunately, it didn’t work out that way, so Luongo, at the very least, was able to get some rest.

The Canucks play the Bruins tomorrow before having 2 days off against Tampa and then have three more games to close out the first half of the road trip before the break. I’m sure the plan was originally to start Raycroft against Boston, but Luongo’s poor play and showing signs of fatigue nixed that. That said, having a fresh Luongo up against the Bruins would maximize the team’s chances of getting 2 vital points, whereas a worn out Luongo probably wouldn’t have made a difference tonight.

Beyond all that, Trois Kronors had probably their worst game in a long time tonight. I mentioned they looked a little out of synch against Montreal. Tonight, it got even worse as the Sedins and Burrows just couldn’t put anything together. Unfortunately, this marks roughly 8 periods where the top line has been largely invisible. They really need to come up big against Boston, insert cliche about your best players have to be your best players, yadda yadda yadda.

I dunno what else to say about tonight’s game. The Canucks should taking last night’s game as motivation. Luongo should hopefully have a fire lit underneath him. Here’s hoping the rest of the team follows his example.