All posts by lorihc

There’s a Shark in the Pool, and Its Name is Canada

Caroline Oulette of Team Canada (Photo by Tyler Ingram)

Caroline Oulette of Team Canada (Photo by Tyler Ingram)

I’m writing this post at the second intermission of the Canada vs. Slovakia women’s hockey game, and it’s already 12-0 Canada. I think Canada was kind of slacking in the second period, actually, scoring only five goals.

Poor Slovakia.

This is the bummer of women’s Olympic hockey, one I’d forgotten about in the run-up to the Games, when the U.S. women’s team was taking on Team Canada, the University of Minnesota, and other hockey powerhouses: half the teams in the pool are what USAHockey would consider B-level at best. The scores in the early games tend to be lopsided, especially when Team USA or Team Canada is on the ice.

I feel Slovakia’s pain. My hockey team was Slovakia in the equivalent of a game against Canada tonight. We didn’t play badly; in fact, we played quite well. Our goalie was awesome. And yet we lost 12 or 13-0. (I don’t know the exact score. The scorekeeper stopped posting goals after 9.) We were just completely outmatched by women who could skate faster, shoot harder, and control the puck better than we could.

Oh man, 14-0 now. I swear, every time they go to commercial, Canada scores. Wait, now it’s 15-0. I think I just missed one when I was typing that last sentence.

While I was adding a title to this post, Canada scored another goal. They’ve now tied the record for the biggest goal differential in Olympic hockey, set by none other than Team Canada in a match against Italy in 2006.

For what it’s worth, Slovakia’s goaltender, Zuzana Tomcikova, has been excellent. The score is more a reflection on the defensemen in front of her, and on Canada’s speed and experience, than on the goalie. She’s made some amazing saves—sometimes multiple saves in a row. (In the time it took to confirm Tomcikova’s first name and comment on the quality of the D to my husband, Canada scored two more goals, making the current score 18-0.)

I should make clear that while I think it’s a bummer for the spectators (and for the losing team) when the score is so lopsided, I don’t think the stronger team should hold back, especially in a tournament setting like the Olympics, where you’re likely to face equally strong opponents in future games. If you play down to the level of the weaker team, you risk losing your edge—and losing to a worthier opponent. I say this even as a member of the usually-weaker team in my league.

Okay, the carnage is finally over. The final score is 18-0. Jaina Heffer had 4 goals, the most ever by an individual player in a single Olympic game, but I think Captain Haley Wickenheiser said it well when she responded to a question from the NBC reporter about who impressed her the most: it’s hard to say in a game like this, when there are so many opportunities, so much room to maneuver. Everybody ends up looking good because they don’t have to work as hard.

She also mentioned that games like this one are dangerous, as they give you a chance to fall into bad habits—and she’s right.

Speaking of that, Sweden defeated Switzerland 3-0 in the Pool A early game today. Commentator Cammie Granato (who’s great off-camera, but absolutely terrible on—hello, affect?) rightly observed that Sweden wouldn’t be able to pull some of the tricks they’d been employing against weaker Switzerland when they matched up against Canada. At the point I had to leave for my own game, I think Sweden’s defensemen had more blocks than their goalie had saves. Cammie remarked that blocking the shot wouldn’t be enough against Canada, that the Canadian skaters would just pick the puck up again and go around the defensemen—and from what I saw in the game against Slovakia tonight, she’s right. I’m now really looking forward to Canada’s game against Sweden on Wednesday.

I’ll probably skip the Canada vs. Switzerland matchup.

[Photo]

Dudes, the Olympics are Coming!

Yep, believe it or not, the 2010 Olympic Winter Games in Vancouver, British Columbia (that’s in Western Canada, if you’re map-challenged) start this Friday with the qualifying round of individual ski jumping in the morning, and the opening ceremony in the evening. (See the full schedule on the official Vancouver 2010 website; I believe all times are PST.)

For me, however, the games don’t really start until 3 p.m. EST on Saturday, when the puck drops in the first women’s hockey game: Sweden vs. Switzerland. I’ll be in the car then, headed to my own hockey game in Harrisburg, Pa., but I plan to set the DVR. I’ll be in the car back for the later game as well (Canada vs…. Slovakia?), so I’ll be watching a lot of DVR’d hockey when I get home.

2010 U.S. Womens Hockey Team captains Julie Chu, Jenny Potter, Natalie Darwitz, and Angela Ruggiero

2010 U.S. Womens Hockey Team captains Julie Chu, Jenny Potter, Natalie Darwitz, and Angela Ruggiero

On Sunday, Feb. 14 I’ll plan my day around the first U.S. game vs. China. I saw the U.S. women’s team systematically dismantle the Chinese team in an exhibition game leading up to the 2002 Games, beating them by something like 15 goals. I sure hope China’s gotten better since then, because the U.S. team certainly has. They’ve been training like maniacs ever since their disappointing bronze-medal finish in Torino four years ago, and they’ve got returning veterans like Jenny Potter and Angela Ruggiero (who’ve played on all three women’s Olympic hockey teams), Julie Chu, and Natalie Darwitz (whom I remember from her rookie year in 2002). The team even has a set a twins – forwards Jocelyne and Monique Lamoureux – and a 5′ tall powerhouse named Erika Lawler, who had a goal and an assist in the U.S.’s 5-1 win over Finland in the final Olympic warmup.

Honestly, all the women on the team totally wow me, and I cannot wait to see them play several games in a row. As a hockey lover in general I’m interested in the men’s games as well, but less so since I see those guys play all the time in the NHL. The Olympics are kind of like the NHL all-star game played night after night after night. While the individual players may be great, they rarely play as a team, and the experience-of-a-lifetime thrill is missing. It’s there in spades—and so is the team spirit and teamWORK—in the women’s games. I’d recommend a women’s Olympic hockey game over a men’s game any day.

I also recommend, especially if you’re a rec-level hockey player like me, the profile of the U.S. Women’s Hockey team that’s currently running on the Universal Sports Channel called Blood, Sweat, and Cookies. The next air date appears to be 2 p.m. EST on Thursday, Feb. 11. Okay, some it’s kind of dorky, but it’s worth watching for the on-ice segment, which includes tips on playing defense and an explanation of what it really means to “keep your head up,” if nothing else. You’ll also gain a healthy respect for women who can flip a 500-pound tractor tire, climb the Pike’s Peak Incline in 40 minutes or fewer, and cause a bruise the size of a trash can lid with their slapshots.

[Photo: Source]

Hockey’s Stubborn Sunbelt Stand

Distribution of NHL Teams

With teams like the bankrupt Phoenix Coyotes and the Tampa Bay Lightning – who in spite of a 2004 Stanley Cup win are reportedly borrowing from themselves to pay their players – it seems a good time to check on the health of so-called sunbelt hockey.

Despite growing up in Boston Bruins territory, being a Bobby Orr fan as a small child, and attending a high school that had both junior varsity and varsity hockey teams, I only started following the NHL in earnest about 10 years ago, when I started playing the sport myself.

It was actually the 1998 women’s Olympic ice hockey team that got me re-interested in the sport. Working for a company that had a box at the San Jose Sharks’ home arena enabled me to follow it post-Olympics. I am a beneficiary, one could say, of sunbelt hockey (and a Canadian CEO).

I’m also a promoter of amateur hockey—especially adult beginner and intermediate hockey—who can report, anecdotally, that e-mails and comments from newly-minted players in the southeast went up on my hockey blog directly following the championship seasons of the Carolina Hurricanes and the Tampa Bay Lightning.

And yet I can’t help thinking that the NHL needs fewer teams, not more. Thirty teams is a LOT. It’s the same number of teams as in all of Major-League Baseball, in case you were wondering—and baseball is America’s game. Hockey is Canada’s. But putting aside the baffling fact that U.S. NHL franchises outnumber Canadian ones 4:1, I have a hard time understanding how 30 teams can possibly be profitable. Certainly, all 30 can’t be good.

Which brings us back to the sunbelt, and its incompatibility with ice. Do we really need teams in Nashville, Atlanta, Tampa Bay, AND Ft. Lauderdale? (Personally, I’m not sure we need any NHL teams in Florida, much less two of them.) Does the Los Angeles area alone need two teams? Certainly Arizona could do without, don’t you think?

I understand and support Jim Balsillie’s bid to bring an NHL team (specifically the bankrupt Phoenix Coyotes) to Hamilton, Ontario—an area that appears to have more than enough hockey fans to support a franchise. What I absolutely don’t want to see is the kind of dealmaking that finally brought hockey back to Minnesota… but only by adding a team to the league (and leaving the former Northstars in Dallas). In fact, what I’d prefer is a 3-for-1 deal where Balsillie gets to build his Hamilton team from the remains of the Coyotes, Panthers, and Predators… and maybe a Lightning and a Thrasher or two.

[source]
[source]
[source]
[source]

Playing it Forward

red_teesLadies and gentlemen, allow me to acquaint you with the forward tees. Those would be the ones in front. Usually there are two sets, and often—but not always—they are colored gold and red. (On shorter courses, there might only be one set of forward tees.) You may know these tees by the outdated and at best inaccurate (at worst insulting) terms “Seniors’ tees” and “Ladies’ tees”.

Actually, I think I have that backwards. Though I am insulted to be pointed to “the Ladies’ tees,” it’s probably worse that by giving the red tees a girly label, it guarantees that no man will ever want to hit from them. (And likewise, that no one under 65 will hit from the golds.) This is a problem, because many men (and boys) who have not yet developed the strength or skill to make it to the green within four or five shots are nevertheless hitting from the middle—or worse, the back—tees.

The different tee boxes are a way of handicapping the game and making it more fun for everyone. I hit from the reds, or front forward tees, when I play with my husband because when I do and he plays from the middle/white tees, our balls usually end up side by side on the fairway. Depending on the advantage afforded the forward tees, sometimes I outdrive him, and sometimes he outdrives me, but it evens up the game a bit. We can play *together*, and we have an equal chance of scoring well.

When I played a shorter course with my mother-in-law recently, I played from the middle tees and she played from the forward; I probably could have moved back to the blues, given that I consistently outdrove the other couple playing from the whites, but I didn’t feel my skill level was quite up to the back tees.

Where you play from depends on your handicap (or skill level, if you don’t have a handicap; generally, the higher the handicap or the more shots it takes you to reach the green, the further forward you should go), the length and difficulty of the course, and the companions with whom you’re playing. If you’re playing with colleagues from work or otherwise doing business on the course, play from the same set of tees if you can manage it. How well you play is less important than the conversation. (You can always pick up your ball and drop it on the green to putt out with everyone else if you can’t keep up.) If you’re paired up with strangers and are just working on your own game irrespective of whatever they do, play from your regular tees—forward, middle, or back.

Whatever you do, don’t be like the three high school boys I overtook on the course a couple weeks ago, who insisted on hitting from the middle tees when they couldn’t get to the green in under 7 shots; I consistently outdrove them by double the distance between the middle and forward tees (from which I was playing), and I outscored them on all but my worst holes. You could argue that I should have moved back to make the game more even, but I’ll argue more strongly that they should have moved forward. They had neither the distance nor the skill to warrant their choice of tee box.

And while I’m encouraging the men to move forward (and the lower-handicap women to move back), can I just give a shout-out to the starter at Cool Creek Golf Club in Wrightsville, PA and say sir, there is no need to accompany two women golfers to the forward tees, explain how to play each hole, and then emphasize the VERY STRICT TIME LIMIT. First of all, WE’VE DONE THIS BEFORE, and second of all, women golfers are no slower than men. I’d go further and say that it’s the men who insist on waggling and bobbing and taking four practice swings and then stepping back and throwing grass up in the air to check whether the wind has changed before starting the whole procedure again from the beginning that are your problem. Those of us who have been known to finish 9 holes in under an hour are not.

Fantasy Freak

On the drive back from my parents’ house this past weekend, my husband queued up a Mike & Mike podcast from last week in which they talked about the most underrated and overrated players in this year’s fantasy pool. “I saved the Fantasy bit for you,” he said helpfully, knowing that I’d signed up for the Draft Day Suit fantasy league.

After playing for the past six years or so (and helping my husband with his draft for a year or two before that), I’d considered not playing at all this year, or at most joining an anonymous public league. With a 4 1/2 year-old, I just don’t have the time to devote to watching even one entire game on Sundays, much less the 4 or 5 I used to watch when we had the DirecTV NFL Ticket package, and playing fantasy well means paying attention on Sundays at the very least. Both my husband and I have turned our fantasy seasons around by making awesome picks off the free agent list or waiver wire while games were in progress, and if I can’t do that, why bother?

But then Sarah created the Draft Day Suit league, and I couldn’t help myself: I signed up. Of course, signing up with DDS is not like playing in a public league or even a league that I run myself. DDSers know their shit. So when we returned from our car trip to find that the auto-draft had already occurred, and that I got Drew Brees but some rather, er, odd choices, my husband was ready to remind me of the names I’d jotted down on my New York Times during the Mike & Mike podcast.

To his surprise, they’d all been drafted by other teams in the league. “Honey,” I explained, “these people listen to the same podcasts you do. Heck, they might have even—unlike either of us—bought Fantasy magazines this year. These people LOVE SPORTS and are serious about their picks. Of course Brent Celek is gone, and Kevin Boss, too.”

I sure hope Zach or Heath Miller have breakout years.

In related news: I signed up for Yahoo! Sports Fantasy Golf. Yeah, I know. I’m sick.

Blog Widget by LinkWithin