MVN - Most Valuable Network

And I thought parity in the NHL was a GOOD thing…

One of the best times of my week comes, when I open my mailbox and find the new issue of The Hockey News waiting for me along with the umpteen credit card offers and boring stuff like the electric bill.  That one weekly publication (otherwise known as the Bible of Hockey) is often the bright spot in a usually monotonous week.  However, let me say for the record, the overall publication would be better without the ramblings of Ken Campbell, Adam Proteau, and Mike Brophy.  This week was no different.

Tucked in amongst great playoff coverage, a cover story on Sean Avery, and other typical Hockey News fare, was another typical rant by Ken Campbell.  This week’s target was the NHL’s quest towards parity. 

Upon my first read, I wondered if Mr. Campbell really paid attention during the regular season.  My guess is that he’s one of the typical hockey experts who is unaware of the happenings east of Detroit (for the Red Wings are probably the only team in the Western Conference that exists for him).  All three divisions in the Western Conference were a continual battle for supremacy.  In the Central Division we were able to see the “phoenix rising from the ashes” team that is the Chicago Blackhawks.  Led by the rookie talent of Jonathan Toews and Patrick Kane, they almost made their first playoff appearance in many years. 

In the Pacific Division, there were two really interesting things.  First off was the return of the San Jose Sharks.  In the regular season, the Sharks finally clicked.  While players like Jonathan Cheechoo and Patrick Marleau had “off” seasons, others stepped up to the plate.  And it seems that it was San Jose that finally morphed Jeremy Roenick into a player that I can finally respect.  Although, the Sharks’ success this season wasn’t enough to protect head coach, Ron Wilson’s job.  In Anaheim, the league watched the Ducks flounder until Scott Niedermeyer and Teemu Selanne decided later in the regular season to make up their minds they weren’t going to retire.  The other 29 teams in the league had to sit there and watch the Ducks skirt around the salary cap.  The return of Niedermeyer and Selanne resucitated a struggling Ducks team.

And of course in the Northwest Division, it was a nightly guess who would stand on the top of the heap for the next eighteen hours or so.  This season found the Vancouver Canucks on the bottom of the pile and out of playoff contention when they won the division crown last season.  The Minnesota Wild who lost the division crown last year to the Canucks by one point, weren’t about to let that happen again.  Overall points were down in the Northwest Division this year, but that was probably due to the season-long game of tug-o-war in the division.  If one were to do the research, I would suspect that they’d find the points available in the Northwest Division were more evenly distributed this season.

My second thought upon reading Campbell’s diatribe, is that he is clearly stuck in the past.  His examples for why parity is bad clearly dates him.  The Montreal Canadiens of past were dream teams.  The players one thinks about on those long-ago Canadiens teams have all been inducted into the Hockey Hall of Fame.  His other examples are the New York Islanders of the early 1980’s, and the Edmonton Oilers’ dynasty that came right after those four Islanders’ Cups.

To me, it seems that Campbell wants to do away entirely with the salary cap.  I don’t know about you, but I sure don’t want to go back to watching the New York Rangers spend a boatload year after year and get nothing in return.  Sure, it made for a good laugh, but it wasn’t good for the league.  What Campbell doesn’t take into account is the inflated salaries that started making their appearance in the late 1980’s and early 1990’s.  While star players still go for a premium price, having a salary cap in place definitely limits the amount a decent, mid-range player can ask for.  When they start asking more than market value, the team finally has a reason to cut them loose.  I sure don’t want to see more work stoppages.

Yes, dynasties are fun to watch, but they’re not the only way.  Personally, I prefer the constant battle to stay on top.  To me, it’s boring to watch a team get to the top and stay on top.  I was more excited by Chicago than Detroit.  If a team can’t figure out how to win consecutive Cups, that’s the fault of the team, not the league.  Anaheim probably stood a better chance of winning a second Cup if they had figured out a way to have both Niedermeyer and Selanne from the beginning of the season.  That’s Anaheim’s problem, not mine, not the NHL’s.  I also don’t need a dynasty to find a team to hate as Campbell stated.  Between my overall dislike of the Canucks and the antics of the Ducks from last year’s playoffs, I don’t need a dynasty team.  I guess that’s how I’m different from Campbell.  Where Campbell is most like a concrete-sequential type person, I can think outside the box.

I guess I should be happy about Campbell’s drivel in one way.  For the time being, I’m not hearing that Jacques Lemaire and the Minnesota Wild are ruining hockey.  Oh wait, that will most likely be next week’s spiel (or whenever he runs out of material).

This entry was posted on Tuesday, May 13th, 2008 at 7:46 am and is filed under NHL Editorial. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.