The Athletic Hockey Show - Matt Duchene, hockey gods, and the NHL’s bad replay review system

Episode Date: May 20, 2024

On today’s Monday edition of The Athletic Hockey Show, Ian and Laz discuss Victoria Day, tonight’s “one anthem” Game 7 between the Oilers and Canucks, including Brock Boeser’s absence, who should be favored in the Rangers-Panthers Eastern Conference Final, Rod Brind’Amour’s 5-year extension with the Hurricanes, if Sheldon Keefe is destined to coach the Devils, and more.Plus, DGB debates Laz on the abolition of the NHL’s suspect replay review system and weighs in on the Leafs hiring Craig Berube as the team’s new head coach, and The Athletic’s own Jesse Granger talks Igor vs. Bob in the ECF, if goaltending is BS or not, Arturs Silovs and Thatcher Demko, updated Stanley Cup odds, and quite possibly the solution to the replay review dilemma. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

This is the Athletic Hockey Show. And welcome back to it, everybody. It is your Monday edition of the Athletic Hockey Show. And for all of us north of the 49th parallel, we say a happy Victorian day to you. It's a holiday up here in Canada. We got a game seven between two Canadian teams. It feels like summer in a good chunk of the country.

Laz had no idea, though. Mark Lazarus and our producer, Chris Flannery, had no idea that Victoria Day even existed until I set the note in the Slack last week and informed them that I will work on a holiday Monday and they're like, what's this holiday? What are you talking about? I honestly don't truly have a firm grasp of your relationship to the United Kingdom. That's my problem here. This is Queen Victoria we're talking about, right? I know. This is the problem is that, you know, when we got founded as a country in 1867, it was sort of as a, you know, under the Commonwealth. So we, we didn't

bust out of the, the shackles of the UK like you did. We didn't throw things into the harbor, you know? Like, like Queen Elizabeth's on the money, you know, she's on one of the bills, right? Like, like you guys are really kind of into this whole England thing. Oh, we're in too deep. That's why I don't understand. Like you have a whole holiday here that is based on a queen who's been dead for over hundred years, I believe, right? Yeah, I think so. I couldn't even tell you. And the point of the weekend, I'm told, is to drink a full case of beer. Yeah. So the funny thing is most of us, people will call it Victoria Day in Canada, but you might hear a lot of people referred to it as May 24th. And the reason why they call it May 24th is, well, often it will fall around the 24th of May, like in and around May 24th,

So May 24. But more aptly, it's May 24, 4 because you're supposed to, you know, you go through a case of beer, 24 cans of beer. It's May 2.4 weekend. But it's very much, if you strip aside the weird Commonwealth British element, it is very much like how you treat Memorial Day next weekend, which is it's like the hard launch to summer. It's not a soft launch.

It's the pools get opened up and everybody's barbecuing. Memorial Day has a heavier meaning, obviously. It's, it's, it's, it's, you know, but that is how we Americans celebrate. We don't celebrate it by, like, having solemn, you know, moments of silence. Most of us don't do that. We go and have a barbecue and drink beer, too, so I get it. And I, I like it. Dude, I'm here for it.

I'm here for any excuse to, you know, barbecue and have a drink. I want some May 2-4 in my life. But here, let me, let me spin off of that, though. You mentioned that it's an all Canadian game seven tonight. Yeah. And I keep seeing that. And I keep seeing all series on, it's a one anthem day. Why does that matter so much?

Why does that matter so much to Canada? We have all American hockey games all the time. We're not like, ooh, it's the hurricanes and the Rangers. One anthem day. Why does that matter so much? Because there's only seven. We only have seven out of 32. So it's rare.

Like the Vancouver Canucks have like two Canadians on their entire roster. Like this is such a global game. I don't understand why that matters. It seems like a weird thing to get excited about to me. I don't understand that. Okay, but explain to me the Canadian, and this is the wrong phrase for it, and I apologize in advance,

but it's like an inferiority complex, where it's like, this is our game and you guys stole it, and it means more when it's on our side of the border exclusively. Like, I don't, like, I'm going to Canada. I'm going to the Western Conference final. I'll be in Vancouver or Edmonton, and I love it up there.

And I love all things Canada, but I don't quite understand the, what the difference is that it's an all-Canadian matchup. I think part of it is rooted in, it's very rare to get an all-Canadian playoff series. Now, like, back in the 80s and 90s, it used to happen all the time. You used to get Montreal, Quebec.

You used to get, you know, Edmonton, Calgary, Vancouver, Wittipag, all the, they would always play. And I think if you go back in the last 15 or 20 years, it's pretty rare to get an all-Canadian playoff matchup. So that part matters because of the rivalry factor. Like we all like Vancouver hates Edmonton and Edmonton hates Vancouver. And I love that.

Sure. But one thing I want to just detonate here is the idea that we're as a country, we're cheering for the Stanley Cup to come home. We're not. I want to make that very clear. All right. If you're a Vancouver fan, if you're a Vancouver fan, you want to connect. to win the cup. If you lose this series, you're not going to wake up on Tuesday or Wednesday,

say, ah, you know, we lost, but gosh darn, I hope the oil is bringing home for us. We don't care. Nobody cares. Because it always feels like, you know, it matters that the Canadians haven't won a cut, that Canada hasn't won a cup since 93. We would love to win a Stanley Cup, but we would love it if it was our team. Right, right. That makes sense of it. Calgary Flames fans are watching Vancouver Edmonton right now say, boy, they're going. This is awesome. Like one of them, one of them's going to go to the conference

finals. That's the perception. That is, other than the Leafs, because everybody wants to point and laugh at the Leafs, there is that the perception down here is that you guys do want that, which always seemed absurd to me.

And I never bought it. Yeah, it could be for the exact. Calgary and Edmonton are not going to root for each other. That's not how this works. Okay. So there's a crazy. So if you are, you might see this commercial,

last, when you come up to Canada next week for either Vancouver at Abington. So there is a commercial playing on SportsNet up here during the stand the cup playoffs for a pizza chain up here called Boston Pizza. Sure. Well, a lot of Americans might know Boston Pizza. Anyway, long story short, the commercial shows all of these like broken televisions and shattered things from, so it starts with 1994 Vancouver because they lost in the

cup final. then it's like 2002 Toronto because they lost to Carolina then it's Edmonton in 2017 and it's like smash TVs and broken things and it's like the whole premise of the commercial is you know for 30 years

Canadian fans have been angry now it's time to come together maybe this is the year that we all need to cheer for each other and it's like a shot of two guys cheering each other with beers and it's like let's say it's a vaid ober and a Calgary fan.

And all of us in Canada are like, what are you talking about? We don't care. We don't care. I could promise you. Is it an American thing to repeatedly point out that a Canadian team hasn't won the Stanley Cup is 93? Is that what the problem is here? Is it just us being just kind of jerks?

No, no, it's both. It's the Americans looking at ha-ha, you haven't won your favorite trophy in 30 years, which there's a lot of merit to because it is a little bit embarrassing. But at the same time, none of us up here are just pining for any rando team to win the cup. It's got to be our favorite team. That's all that matters. Yeah, I don't care. Like I wasn't as a kid going, oh, I'm just happy the Rangers won this time the cup because it's been a while since a New York team has won it.

No. That's not how this works at all. No, not at all. But anyway, I needed to get that off my chest. No, I'm glad you did. That's a misconception that needed to be cleared up. Absolutely. It's fun though when you have an all-Canadian series that's going to a game seven and the winning team punches their ticket to the Western final.

But I got to tell you last, even without a game on Sunday, there were some dramatic plot twists in Vancouver, Edmonton. And the Brock Bessor's story with his blood clotting issue, which will certainly keep him out of the seventh game of the playoffs and possibly and likely beyond that was. something nobody saw coming. I mean, Bessner's been about as good of a forward as Vancouver, productive as afford as Vancouver's had all playoff. This is a stunning blow to Vancouver going into this seventh game. It's devastating. 40 goals this year. He had, what, 12 points and 12 playoff games this year. This is absolutely mammoth loss. And like, you know, you and I were trying to, and our producer, Chris, we were trying to come up with comparables. Like, when has a player had it, like, we've had players get injured because, you know, you get hit and, you know, you break your

shoulder that happens in the playoff series but when has an injury like this like a kind of like out of left field one come up right before a game seven like this it's yeah it has to throw the entire Canucks roster for a loop you got to be they got to be like you know you could talk about bunker mentality and rallying around a player all you want but they just lost maybe their best player at least in this series and and the best offensive weapon right before a game seven in an all Canada playoff series that's right like it's this just doesn't happen and it's it's it's really awful because you know you want to see the best players play in the biggest moments and you really feel for brock bestor and you really

feel for the canucks the one we thought about was like and it was very random out of left field was which peter forsper in 2001 but as you pointed out to me uh is he basically he played a game seven that they won and then he didn't play again right yeah because he had a lacerated spleen right he had the Mark Stone injury. Man, I think, I think, like, the only other guy can think of that just randomly out of the blue other than Forsburner, I was thinking about this last night, was in the 90s, Patrick Waugh,

and I want to say it was the year after they won the Cups with 94, in the middle of a playoff series against Boston, I believe, had to go for an appendectomy. And it was, like, shocking news. Like, Patrick Waugh's out, he's got an appendectomy. Yeah, it doesn't do about that. No, and I think he only missed, the crazy thing is last, I think you only miss one game.

And he came back. Like, it's, yeah, but, but this is, and I understand we're recording this year on Monday. By the time a lot of people listen to this on, maybe they listen to it Tuesday or whatever, game seven will have happened and all of this will be a moot point. But, but like to me, this is, this is like a series where, If Vancouver wins, I think a lot of us will be shot.

Can we admit that? I think a lot of us thought, not that Edmonton would mop the floor with them, but I think if you had to make an educated guess going into this series, that Edmonton would win. And so for even this to get to a seventh game, I think the Canucks have at least or should have at least erased a lot of their doubts around them, right? In the last 10 days? Yeah, I mean, to make it to a game seven against the team as dynamic,

as the Oilers with your third string goaltender is pretty impressive and Chilots has been terrific. But Thatcher Demko is, you know, he's not playing tonight in game seven. He's so, I mean, to get to, if you can win this series without Thatcher Demko against this Oilers team, what a testament

that is to the Canucks resilience, to their depth, and that's the huge advantage they have over Edmonton, is they're just a deeper team. Edmonton is obviously incredibly top heavy, though that top is amazing. It's really like, like both teams deserve some credit in this, you know, the Oilers had their own goaltending situation where Skinner got benched.

Now he's back. There's been a lot of turmoil in this playoff series. I just covered Hurricanes Rangers and it was pretty much just on ice drama. There's been so much off ice drama everywhere else, particularly in this Edmonton, Vancouver series. And that's a lot to overcome. And it's been a weird series because it hasn't really been all that competitive for a seven game series. It's been a lot of kind of blowouts either way, which I think underscores the thing I've been harping on all playoffs, which is that there is no such thing as momentum game to game.

Momentum only exists within a game. I have absolutely no opinion on who's going to win tonight. I couldn't tell you. Vancouver's got home ice. Edmonton's got McDavid to dry-sidal. Vancouver's missing one of its pop scorers. Edmonton has Stuart Skinner in that. There's a lot of reasons to doubt both of these teams.

But it's going to be a tough pill to swallow, which whichever one loses, because this was clearly a winnable series on both sides. Does it kind of, is it mind-blowing to you? And I know that the stat got passed around on the weekend, that if Vancouver wins game seven on Monday, it'll be the first time ever that the final four in the NHL, the conference finals, will feature four division winners. The Rangers, the Panthers, and the stars have all won their division.

They've all advanced. If Vancouver does it, and they capture the Pacific Division, be the first time ever that the final four is four division winners. And think about this, the NHL has had at least a four division format in some way, shape, or form since 1974. So for 50 years, we've basically had some sort of four. At times there were six divisions, but usually at least four, is it mind-blowing? Or is it, now that makes sense because the NHL's playoffs is just a random lottery and it feels

like it's a roll of the dice. Well, you think it would have happened once or twice, right? I mean, it's not surprising that it usually doesn't happen, but it's ridiculous that it's never happened, especially when you had six division winners that you couldn't get four of them to make it to the final four. You know, when you, when you're filling out your NCAA tournament bracket, you know, you're not supposed to put four one seeds down, but we see one seeds to make it to the final four all the time. For never to have happened where all four top seeds, essentially, they are top seeds the way the format is right now for them not to make it in the same year. It is a testament to the flukiness of hockey, to the parity of the league.

Obviously, like an eight seed like Nashville, there's a lot of teams like that that are better than their record would indicate that they're coming in hot. Then you have eight seeds like the capitals who just don't stand a chance, but those are, there's more predators than there are capitals in the playoffs. Like usually the eighth seed is not a push over. So it's just a testament to just how deep this league is and how the salary caps. really has, you know, love it or hate it, and most people don't like it.

It has leveled the playing field as well as maybe any sport that's out there. I kind of feel like regardless of who wins game seven, Vancouver, Edmonton, they're going to waltz into the Western final as a pretty, I don't know if heavy underdogs the right term, but I think a lot of people will look at Dallas and say, that's the team to beat. And it doesn't matter if it's Edmonton, and it doesn't matter if it's Vancouver.

Like the Dallas stars to me, like at some point we've got to look at in the salary cap era, having a tough road to get to the, like, think about Dallas. In the first two rounds, they've beaten the last two Stanley Cup champions in Vegas and Colorado. And now in the third round, they're either going to get the McDavid dry-sidal Frankenstein or they're going to get another division winner in Vancouver. And then if they get to the cup, they're either going to get the president's trophy winner or the team that went to the finals last year. So, like, this is a hard road, but, boy, Dallas, to me, has really sort of found their, they found their stride. Ottingers look really good. And all of a sudden, boy, it doesn't matter to me.

I think they're going to come into that Western finalist that everyone's going to say, you're going to have a hard time beating that team four times out of seven. Yeah, I will say they'll be a heavy favorite. I really do think that they are just a significantly better team than either Vancouver or Edmonton and right now because Edmonton doesn't have the depth that, like Dallas is like a perfectly construct a team. You've got two true number one lines and you've got depth scoring and you've got the number one defenseman in the high skin and who's just one of the best players in the league. And you've got the goalie. Edmonton doesn't have the depth and doesn't have the goalie.

Vancouver doesn't have the goalie. And now without Besser, they don't really have the top, the top two lines that can really match up well with what Dallas has. The amazing thing is Dallas hasn't even played its best. Ottinger's had a couple of shaky games. You know, someone like Rupert Hintz, I expected more out of him. He had a couple of breakout games, but, you know, hasn't produced at the level you expect, a guy like a Thomas Harley, like there's a lot more offense for the Dallas stars to give. And that's just how good they are, is even when they're not firing on all cylinders,

they are still incredibly good. Whereas Edmonton is completely dependent on those top two lines. And Vancouver is, you know, also really dependent on Eliasch Pedersen getting hot finally. And, you know, without Besser in there, I just, I'm not convinced that they can really hang with the Dallas Star. It's just, it's not really a knock on those two teams. They're just banged up and are playing with, you know, mediocre goalies.

Dallas is a perfectly constructed team. Let's shift gears for a second. I want to chat about the Eastern Final. I know you're going to be covering the Western Final, but you were, you had a front row seat for the Rangers in Carolina. And you want to talk about a nail biting series that didn't feel like it was going to be a nail biter? It was that one. Before we kind of break down Rangers Panthers,

Can you walk me and the listeners through what's going through Mark Lazarus's mind Thursday night? I think it was Thursday night last week. So the hurricanes have won game four, they won game five, and now they're playing game six. And now they're up 3-1 on home ice. And you're probably thinking, my goodness gracious, I'm going back to Madison Square Garden for game seven. My travel schedule, everything. I can't believe what's going on. Like what's going through your mind at 3-1 Carolina on home-up?

and Thursday night. Well, it's funny, because when it's 3-0, you're like, fine, let's just end this. We could call it, get the sweep done. I get a week at home before going out west for the Western final. And then when Carolina wins that one, it's like, all right, fine, five games is fine. And then when Carolina wins five, that's you're like, oh, my God, I got to go back to Carolina now.

And that's where you start doing the travel math in your head. And at some point, you just come to accept, look, if they win game six, I get to cover a game seven. It's only, it's guaranteed to be just two more days. It was that extra day in Raleigh. They had that built-in extra day there. Yeah. When Carolina won game five, that's when everyone in the press box is like,

oh, shit, we got to go to Raleigh for three more days. That's what it becomes like an issue. And it's like, you know, the first part of a series is fun. And you're going out for drinks and dinner every night with all the other writers and having a good time. By the time you get to game six, everyone's tired. Everyone's just trying to get through the night, get their stories in. Let's just get this over with.

But then you get to the point where I get to get to do a game. seven and it's hard to pass up at game seven so then it's like a no lose situation like at that point you know if if if if chris crider hadn't pulled that natural hat trick out of nowhere in the third period it's like all right two more days hype up a game seven a game seven in madison square garden between two great hockey teams what more could you want out of this job right so i would have been fine going back but when crider won it it's like oh i get to go home tomorrow that's not bad either so you reach that point where it's like you're good either way so we got the rangers and the Panthers. And I'm curious, though, what you think of the Rangers right now, because

if you look at their record on paper, they're 8 and 2, right, in the playoffs. It's not like, you know, but I think a lot of people are like, oh, you're 8 and 2, but your last three games, four games haven't been overly, you know, convincing. Adam Fox seems a little bit banged up or just not. He has not been himself. Oh, I'll tell you, he usually leaps off the page for me. Like when you watch a Rangers game, you just see him. And he doesn't look as dynamic and is dangerous. You know, Panarin even kind of went in and out of that series a little bit. Like, what's the feeling you think about around the range?

Like, if you had to say Rangers Panthers, is there a favorite in your mind in this series? It's tough. I mean, the Rangers won the President's Trophy for a reason, right? They're a really good team. But in this playoffs, they have not really been a great five-on-five team. And you can't really look at the Capitol series and put too much weight. because the caps are just, they were not a playoff caliber team. Now, Carolina, that's a really good team.

And they're the best five-on-five team maybe in the league. And it looked like it. Like the Rangers won that on the strength of Igor Shestirkin and their special teams. Their special teams were absolutely phenomenal. And you can win the Stanley Cup with goaltending and special teams. We've seen it before. You don't have to be the best five-on-five team. The Rangers aren't a terrible five-on-to-five team.

They're not getting swamped. But Florida has the goaltending, has the experience. has the special teams and has the five-on-five game. I do think that Florida is a favorite going into this series, but I don't think it's by a very wide margin. The Rangers are legit. They can win, and they're showing that they can pull out wins in difficult ways, right? They're not just coasting the wins.

Mika Zabanajad was so hot early in the playoffs. If you can get hot again, if Kreider can carry this over and feel good about himself going in the next and start scoring at a high level again, Vincent Trochec is just a terrific player who does a little of everything for them. Lafrenier has really had a nice breakout this year and he's continued into the playoffs. Adam Fox is getting what five days off here?

Something like that, maybe more. That's huge because clearly he is dealing with somebody. I don't know if it's something that you can recover from in five days, but he should be better off, certainly. The Rangers can beat the Florida Panthers. Will they? Would I put money on it? Probably not, just because I have a lot of respect

for what Florida does. but the Rangers are not like some kind of paper tiger. They earned their president's trophy and they earned their spot in the conference final. Yeah, it's weird how a team that won the president's trophy and is eight and two in the playoffs, there's a lot of... They were huge underdogs to Carolina. You look at like Tom's numbers.

It was like the most lobsided series of the second round according to the numbers. And again, that's a lot of that's because of the five-on-five game, right? But we have seen time and again that really good special teams and a world-class goaltender, which the Rangers have, they have all. that can overcome that easily. You know, and the Panthers are really impressive to me because remember, when they got

to the final last year, and they ended up losing, obviously, in the Stanley Cup to Vegas, but what was the enduring image of the Panthers last year? They were broken and beaten and battered and bruised, right? Montador and Kachuk. And like, these guys, we were like, wow, they just emptied the tank. It's going to be really hard for them to come back. Guess what? They're in the final four.

And that's really impressive, right, given where they were last year and the physical and the mental wear that they took. And I looked this up, as I was like, how many times has a team lost in the final and then at least, and then gotten back to the final the next year? Twice in 40 years. Wow. It's, and I looked it up. It's Edmonton who lost to the Islanders in 1983 and then bounced back and won the cup in 84. And it's the Pittsburgh Penguins who lost to the islanders. who lost to Detroit in 08 and turned around and beat Detroit in 09.

That's it. That's it in the last 40 years. You lose in the cup and you come back the next year. So this is really impressive, isn't it? It's hard, man. Like I remember, you know, I covered the Hawks during those, that 2013, 2014, 2015 run where they played in 10, 11 playoff series. They won the Stanley Cup and then went to game seven overtime conference final and then

won the Stanley Cup. So they were, by the end of that 2015 run, were just dead. They were just, they had nothing left. They barely celebrated on the ice. They were so tired. And like, I remember I found Nicholas Jalmersen after where I'm like, how you feel? He goes, I'm effing tired, man. Like he just like finally admitted it. And it's really hard to do. Like there is a, I feel like that playoff run in particular took years off the careers of some of those guys. Like Duncan Keith and Brent Seabrook, they fell off a cliff after that because they were playing 35 minutes tonight that entire playoff run and their third straight deep playoff run and none of them would

trade it for anything like it was worth it but there is a price you pay for that kind of for playing two months of extra hockey that your opponents didn't it takes its toll and you have a short summer and it's hard to recover i do have a theory though and tell me if you think there's anything to do this and i'm gonna i think i'm gonna ask guys this when i get out west that when you're an elite team and you know you're going to make the playoffs i don't think the regular season is as taxing as this. Like last year, Florida was in playoff mode from January on. Like I talked to Paul Maurice about that and how he felt like, you know, they were in that playoff mode from about January 1st on, just scratching and cloning.

They didn't get into the playoffs into that last week of the season. And then to go on the playoff run, you just have nothing left. Florida Panthers were never in doubt this year. And just like the Rangers were never in doubt this year. Vancouver, never in doubt this year. Dallas never in doubt this year. I think that there's a freshness that comes on, a mental freshness of nothing else. that you haven't been playing with that pressure hovering over you for so long.

It's just been since mid-April. It hasn't been all year. And there's something to be said in that first round that you look like like Nashville was fighting to get in and that's why they were dangerous in the first round. But beyond that, I think it's the teams that didn't have to try that hard in the regular season that have the best chance that aren't worrying about seating, that aren't worried about just getting in. There is a mental freshness that comes with that that pays off when you get to the third round in the Stanley Cup final. Yeah, it's, you know what, that's a fair point.

Like, but, but then, yeah, like that, like Florida last year, it's weird, right? Because you're, yeah, that's what they did last year is incredibly difficult to do. Yeah, yeah. And you saw how broken they were physically and mentally by the end of it. But, but even like, like, and St. Louis, when they won the cup in 20, what was the 2019? 19, yeah. It was the same type of thing. They were like, kind of from mid-January on.

It was like, okay, every game is a must-win game. Yeah, right? And it, it grinds you. It's hard to do that for six months, right? Six weeks, maybe. I think we underestimate the mental toll that the playoffs take. Like, it is hard, man. We don't know it's a physical grind.

They're playing every other night in these really hard-hitting, you know, life or death seemingly affairs. But the mental toll is severe on these players, the pressure they feel knowing, you know, I might never get another shot of this. This might be my best shot to win the championship. That takes its toll, man. All right.

I'll tell you what, Las. We're going to bring on somebody who also understands the true importance of Victoria Day up here and what it means. Because Laz has no clue. Sean McAood, down goes Brown. A happy Victoria Day to you, my friend. Thank you very much and to you as well. A very sacred holiday for you guys about a queen from a different country who was like 120 years ago

or something and let's drink some beer. I love it. That's it. May 24 weekend. That is also apparently something. some other kind of holiday, but who knows. The sacred, sacred weekend. Yeah.

May 2-4. All right. Hey, let's get right to it because I, Sean, I, and I think this is going to be a fun conversation. And what I'm going to do is I'm going to play, I'm going to play referee or arbitrator or the neutral party here because I think we got two opinions here. This is going to be fun. And you wrote a column today.

Yeah. You wrote a column today. And I love how you tied in. You go old. school with Brett Hall and it's 25 years since that and it's Dallas and it's a game six and then you go back to what happened Colorado Dallas and it's Matthew Shane and he's the guy in the middle of the the offside rule 10 years ago, all that stuff. Anyway, all this to say, I want to give you the opportunity to start. Actually, we're going to do this like it's a debate.

Maybe the debate moderator. Wow. Yeah. And we're going to allow Sean. You mean you're going to be a coward with no opinion. I see how it is. That's right. That's right. No, I'm going to wait to hear both your arguments and see where I fall. But basically, we're going to debate the merits of video review in the National Hockey League as it pertains to two things in particular, goalie interference and offside. So we're going to give McIndoo the floor first to present his arguments as to why the league should abolish video review for those two things. Thank you, Mr. Moderator. I'm, look, I'm a very big fan of listening to the hockey gods and paying attention when they kind of reach across the veil and try to talk to us. And yeah, you're right.

What are the two most obvious signposts in the NHL's journey towards replay review? It's Brett Hall's goal in game six overtime, 99 final. It's Matthew Shane being offside by 10. fee. So when the hockey gods serve up a Dallas Stars game six overtime trying to eliminate the other team on the road just like in 99 and they serve up a replay controversy. I pay attention. And when that replay controversy features none other than Matt Duchain, dude, I don't have to read between the lines. There's no lines to read between. This is a giant flashing sign from the hockey god saying something is screwed up and something is screwed up and it's the replay system

in the NHL it's bad it doesn't work it hasn't work it's not making anybody any happier it's not making anybody feel like we're quote unquote just getting it right it's just giving us all even more reason to be mad all the time about everything it's giving us all a reason to see exciting moments in big games and playoff games where goals are scored and immediately have that little part of our hockey fan brain that says, well, hold on,

maybe there's some ridiculous get-out-of-jail-free card's going to get played here and this isn't going to count. And it frankly is a mess. And I've written about ways that we could improve it. Other people have, Shane had a good piece over the weekend. But sometimes

you just got to look reality in the face. You want to fix it? Get rid it. As a wise man once said, this is stupid, dump it. And it hasn't worked for two reasons. First of all, offside, we got the world's fastest game we're arguing over millimeters. Complete nonsense. Stuff that nobody notices in real time, stuff that doesn't directly contribute to the play in a lot of cases. Absolutely ridiculous. Should have never been subject to review in the first place. We did it so that we would catch the next Matt Duchyne, who's offside by 10 feet. It's 11 years later, guys. That play hasn't happened again. It's ridiculous that we're still doing.

this and taking goals off the board and we've got employees getting into the headphones of coaches saying, oh, we've already freeze framed it and we think we found a millimeter somewhere. Absolute nonsense. Goalie interference, hey, maybe goalie interference should be something this revealable, but the problem with the rule is it's almost entirely subjective. That Matthew Shane play on Friday night, the only part of that controversy, that dispute that was objective, black and white in the rulebook is Matthew Shane in the crease or not. And even that is very, very difficult to see in replay.

So even your black and white part doesn't look all that black and white. The rest of it is the contact incidental? That's subjective. Did it prevent the goaltender from playing his position? That's subjective. Did the goaltender have time to get back? That's subjective. These are subjective calls and yet we're freeze framing them as if we're going to find one pixel somewhere that tells us the answer to a subjective question.

It's a total mess. my question for people is not do you like replay review. My question is, do you feel like we're getting it right? Does this make you feel happy as a fan? Does this make you feel like this league has got it under control and we're getting it right? Nobody feels that way. Nobody thinks that way. All we're doing is we've got all the costs, all the slowdowns, all the lack of excitement,

the goals off the board, the 10 minute delays and all of this stuff. We're paying all the cost. We're not getting any of the benefits we were promised, which is we're just going to get it right because nobody still feels like we're getting it right. Except defeat. Do what the league did in 1919. 99 go this rule is stupid. We're getting rid of it.

And we move on. And yeah, if there's some miscalls along the way, guess what? That's sports. We're all grown-ups here. We can handle it. Get rid of it. Only a complete and total moron would defend this system over to you, Mark. I feel like Ross Perot. Can I get in here? Can I get a word in? This is a filibuster.

What's going on here? Feeling lightheaded, man. Take a sip a copy. Look, if I may have the floor for a moment, The NHL is what, a six or seven billion dollar industry now. We're selling teams for a billion dollars, $1.2 billion for a franchise like the Arizona freaking coyotes. How much gambling is happening in this league right now. You have to do what you can to get it right.

And here's the thing, Sean, is usually we get it right. There's a reason that, especially with these, you know, you talk about the millimeter offside deals. Nobody likes those. But the fact of the matter is coaches get that right like 95% of the time now. Like offside is an easy call. It is black. It's blue and white. It's not black and white.

It's blue and white. And it's easy to get the call. The problem, you look at all sports. I'm watching a lot of NBA lately. My Knicks lost yesterday to the Pacers. They review everything now, right? They review, you know, possession because it matters. Did it go off of my fingertip or not?

That matters. It matters to gamblers, which I don't really care about. But it matters to fans. It matters to the results. It matters to the competitive interest of the sport. And this fundamentally is a sport. It's a competition. and you need to get it as right as you can.

In baseball, we're reviewing, you know, did his finger come off the bag as he was sliding in and then he, while the tag was on his back, well, then he's out because that's just the rule. There's letter of the law, and we have to get it as right as we possibly can. Nobody, I'm not arguing that we love replay, that we're excited about a replay.

But more often than not, we get it right. The problem is the execution of it. That Matt Duchayne won the other night in game six. That was just officials and the war room being afraid. to decide a game on that. If that had been called a goal on the ice, that's a goal. That was, we don't want to change this call

and fundamentally decide a series. That's cowardly. Like, that's the problem there. We all saw it. We all know that's a goal. We all know that's not interference. If there was any contact, it's because Kail McCar pushed Matt DeShane

into his goalie. That is a goal. That was just cowardly. We need better execution of replay. We need to somehow make it more efficient, but every single sport is going to more replay. We're going to be reviewing, you know,

pass interference calls, it's only a matter of time. We do review targeting calls in football. They do break it down to see, was this really targeting? Should this be an ejection? Should this be 15 yards? It sucks. We all hate it. It takes forever, but it matters to get it right.

When it comes down to what, we have to do what we can to get it right. And the NHL is not very good at that yet. But taking it away, we're just guaranteed to get it wrong over and over and over again. Well, I'll tell you, I will allow each of you one final statement, but I will say. I get my rebuttal, right? You get you each get a reply. I want his mic cut off at 60 seconds. I want this indoor.

I want him standing up. I want to make sure he has the stamina that sleepy Sean McIndoo can stand up for a minute straight and hold a coherent thought. I love it. But I will say, last, he's got the edge on you right now only because he recognized me as Mr. moderator and you did not. Yeah. I'm just saying. Show some respect.

I have absolutely no respect for the moderator. A couple things. A couple things. I just want the record to. indicate that Mark's case for replay included, I believe, the phrase, this is stupid and we all hate it. Boy, that's it. I said it sucks and we all hate it. It sucks and we all hate it. Is an argument in favor. Okay. Second of all, and I'm not. Welcome to sports in the modern era, baby. I'm not trying to play gotcha here, but Mark said,

hey, we're going to have this for pass interference eventually. We did have it for pass interference. The NFL had a blown call. They put pass interference instant replay in for one year. Guess what? It sucked and we hated it. And the NFL being a league that has a, actual leadership sometimes said this didn't work. Sean McGrath. Roger Goodell guy. As opposed to the NHL, which I've heard, someone has said tend to be cowards on big things. Yeah, I would like to see them make the big call too, the big correct call.

Look, you talk about offside reviews. We just have to get it right. That's an easy call. You know what else is an easy call? Whether a guy has gained the red line before he dumps the puck in on a potential icing. You know what else is an extremely easy call? whether someone's skate is in the wrong place on a face off. That's face off violation if your skates touching the line.

We could review that. We don't. Why don't we review that? Why don't we review those things if it's so important to get it right? Because everybody knows that would suck. We would hate it. Even on offside reviews, we all know, right? You only review the entry right before the goal.

Well, what about all the other entries on the play? That led to that play happening. How come we don't review those if we have to just get it right? because we all understand that would be ridiculous. Just get it right cannot be the rule of thumb here because we all instinctively understand that there's a million things we could review. The problem in the NHL is we've picked two of those million things and we've told the fans we're going to get it right.

We're going to get it right. You're going to be satisfied. You're going to think that these calls are correct. And it doesn't happen. You talk about gambling. Yeah, lots of people have lost money on crappy offside reviews and goalie interference calls that they didn't agree with. You say everybody agreed on Matthew Scheng School.

No, they didn't. I look at my mentions. I had a ton of Avalanche fans and that saying that they thought the call was just fine. This stuff is subjective. We're always going to argue about it. But to slow everything down and say, we're going to stop. We're going to look. We're going to promise you we're going to just get it right and then deliver a system that doesn't get it right.

Look, man, if you've got an actual idea for how to get this system so that it works pretty close to 100% of the time, great. I'd love that. I haven't heard it. It's been 10 years. It's not working. Let's follow the NFL's example with pass interference. Just accept that it didn't work. We tried it.

It's making the game worse. Get rid of it. My biggest argument against you here, and Mr. Moderator can go to hell. I don't care about him. He's sitting here just enjoying the conversation and not injecting any of his own opinion, not putting himself out there in the slightest. See, now I've lost my train of thought because I'm making fun of the moderator. The problem is it's a pipe dream.

what you're talking about. There's no, you want to, you're pining for the old days, and the old days don't exist anymore. This is how sports works. We're going to have, you know, robots calling balls and strikes pretty soon. We've got every NBA play, they're reviewing, you know, whether there was skin contact or whether he got all ball to make sure we get the foul right. And that's largely subjective in a foul situation. Did you have his feet set or not?

We're reviewing, again, targeting. We're reviewing whether a catcher blocked the plate. This is how it works now. In tennis, you've got, you know, the Hawkeye system. Like, we're taking the human element out as much as possible when it comes to officiating. And you can argue whether you like that or not. You clearly don't like that. But that is the way sports are going.

The NHL is already so far behind. The NHL was ahead of the curve with replay. Having the central war room, like the other sports have copied the NHL because it generally works better than any other system does and having, like, the NFL referee looking in this tiny little box trying to shield his eyes from the sun. The NHL system is flawed, absolutely. But it's less flawed than officials who have a very difficult job.

Like you said, this is the fastest game in the world, and you're going to try to decide whether a guy was on side or not. Look, if you don't believe, I'm fine getting rid. I've written last year, I'm fine getting rid of offside. You want to get crazy here. Let's get rid of offside and let guys cherry pick and put their guys shorthand. Let's see how that plays out. But if you're going to have a rule, you have to enforce the rule.

So, Mark, are you in favor of doing replay review on every offensive zone face off to make sure everyone's skates were in the right place. No, because spaceoffs don't matter. We've proven this time and time again. Faceoffs don't matter. It takes 70 matter. We had Leon Recytel had a goal right, or Van der Kaine had a goal right off of face off.

There were four guys who had their skates over the line. If it's about just getting it right, if it's about black and white, that goal shouldn't count. Should that have been reviewed and taken off the board? Well, let's have a conversation between the players and. and governors. And let's decide what they decide is worth reviewing. That would be stupid.

That would be ridiculous. That would be a horrible, horrible idea. And 99% of fans who haven't had their brains completely warped by this idea of technology and all this other stuff, instinctively understand that taking that goal off the board because some guys skate 10 feet away

was in the wrong place would have been ridiculous. They didn't see it in real time. So what? It would be ridiculous, but because we've done offside reviews for 10 years, it's becoming ingrained. We can take it out. We did it in 99 for the skate and the crease rule,

which by the way, everybody's saying we need a more black and white rule for goal interference. We had that in the 90s. Everybody hated it. Everybody thought. No, that rule was terrible. It was absolutely terrible. And then we got rid of it,

but we didn't get rid of it until it ruined a Stanley Cup final. And that's where we're headed with this. nonsense too. We got a warning shot Friday night. That could have ruined that series. I could have determined the game. It didn't Dallas ended up winning great. But we're headed there, guys. Inevitably, this is going to have. We're going to have another Brett Hall situation where some replay is going to screw up what would have otherwise been a great historical memorable moment and then we'll get rid of it because that's the only time this league ever admits a mistake. We won't know. Because a worst situation is missing an obvious call that could have been clear.

fixed by replay. A worse situation is not being able to review it than it is to actually take the time to, yes, it kills the moment. Again, it kills the moment. But if you decide to Stanley Cup, and we live with it. If you decide a Stanley Cup on a goal that can't be reviewed, that was obviously not a goal, that's a million times worse than the review dampening the celebration for six minutes while they're getting it right. I'm not saying that. I'm saying we're going to have that obvious goal. And then we're going to do a 10-minute goalie interference review on something that is

entirely subjective. And then they're going to make a call that people don't agree with anyways. And for the rest of time, it's going to be the goalie interference season instead of the amazing season that we've just had. And you're going to get hundreds of thousands of views and sell several hundred hundreds subs writing about it. It's great for all of us. You know what?

Maybe. Maybe. Look, let's end it there where it's worse to get, it's worse to not be able to review it. Okay. So now is the part, guys, where Ian has got to decide who wins. So what's going to happen is Ian is going to go and he's going to go stand in a corner for 10 minutes while we all sit around and do nothing.

And then he's going to come out and say it's inconclusive. I don't really know who want. It's going to be fascinating podcast. It's going to be so fun, guys, but we're going to get it right. That's what you guys want. And while he's doing that, we're going to play, tell me something. good. Yeah, that's it. Oh, yeah. And I'm going to sit there and just stare down at my iPad so that you can all

watch my developing bald spot from track how it's progressed since the beginning of the season. It's going to be fascinating. Oh, what a great entertainment product. They are never going to take away replay ever. That's not the way sports are going. It's just not happening. Happened in the NFL, buddy. Happened in the NFL. Happened in the NFL before, too. You know what I love? Just remember that. You remember that. You replay fans. It sucks and we hate it and we should change it, but we can't. That's the pro replay argument. I didn't say we should do a better job of executing it. I'm not sure. Yeah, we should execute it to get to that point. We should take it out back. You shouldn't be afraid to say no,

that was the game winning goal in the series winning goal because it was clearly a goal. You know what I love to? I love McAduce slipping in, calling Laz buddy. Yep. Yeah, buddy. We got rid of it. Terrence and Philip over here. Whatever you say, chief. Well, you know, You know what? I'm not your chief guy. All I can do as a moderator is ask our listeners to tell us who won. You can hit us up, The Athletic Hockey Show at gmail.com.

You can tweet at us. Look at us. She's passing the buck even more. He's still not. Maybe this is the answer to the NHL's replay system. Twitter polls? We just turned it into a fancer. God, maybe I just get a call every now and then.

We do like instant Twitter polls after every goal. Was this a goal? You have five minutes. Turns out, even though the Rangers player was 10 feet offside, we have a 99 to 1 win for them over the blue jackets on this replay review. Wouldn't be any dumber than what we're doing now, folks. I would love to hear from our listeners on this one, because clearly there's two legitimate sides of this coin here.

Lazz and McAdoo have laid out the arguments for each side. Tell you what, before we let you go, though, Sean, last called this offside. He called it a blue and white argument, which I thought, okay, this is the perfect segue for us to talk about Craig Baroube coming in and I'm in the head coach for me. Toronto Maple Leafs.

So this happened, by the way, Sean, why do you think that this happened on a Friday at like 5 p.m.? Like, it's kind of weird, isn't it? That's a little weird. I mean, I would assume that the deal just got done. You know, at some point off right, the final T's got crossed or whatever and you got to put the news out there

because otherwise it's, you know, it's Toronto. know someone else is going to jump it. But yeah, having having the press release go out at 502 on a Friday of a long weekend was pretty funny, let's just say, for something that in theory is good news. I think it's good news. I think this is a good hire. I think of all the candidates, this is the one that to me as a fan made the most sense. You get a guy with a winning pedigree and a guy with a personality that is, look, man, if he can't get a little higher, gear out of some of these guys, then I don't think it can be done. And that's, it's a whole other

type of problem. But I like to hire. And to answer the question that everybody's been asking me, yes, I found the jersey. I've got it. It's, it's, it's, it is in rough shape. I got to say, man, it is, it is, it is falling apart. It's, uh, but it's, it's, it's still there. You know, are you people, are you going to wear it? No, because if I wear it, it's going to explode. It's, it's, there's, I get, I get one wear out of this thing. So it's, it did, I'll wear it to the Stanley Cup parade and that, uh, that might be where to game seven against Boston next year has been located. Don't do that. Why are you? I challenge that. Can we go back and make that not happen? A thing happened that I didn't like. Please make it go away.

But yeah, I've got the jersey and, uh, it's, it's, it's, it's ready to go. And what, what, number was Craig Baroube with Toronto? You know what's extra fun? He was number 16. There's only room for one number 16, maybe in Toronto and Craig Barube's world. He was, yeah, he came in number 16. It was the last guy to wear before Borchewski, I think. And then obviously more than a few guys since.

Maybe somebody new in the fall. We'll see. We got to figure out a way that you've got to get that thing signed by Craig Baroube. Yeah, I mean, it. How many leaves for rufe jerseys are out there, right? I have been telling the story for years, and I've never had anyone say that they had one to. I mean, I'm not under the impression that it was the only one at the time. The only one today?

I don't know. You know what? I'd love to see it. I'd love to see it. It's very lonely, and if it's got some long-lost cousins out there, send me a photo. I'd love to see it. but yeah, I'm, I'm going to wear it and I'm going to, I'm working on growing out the Craig Baroubae Circa Toronto Maple Leafs Mullet.

I have absolutely no recollection of Craig Barrabe ever being on the Toronto Maple Leafs. It was, it was for three months, man. It was, it was for three months, but it was in Norris Division. So he fought Bob Probert seven times in those three months. Which is weird because they didn't play the Red Wings at all, but it was, it was a hell of an era. But yeah, he had the full-on mullet. it was,

it was glorious. Man, love it. All right. John, we'll leave it there. Thank you very much for dropping by the Monday pot, spicing it up in the middle

with a heated debate against Laz. And I wish, you know, we should have, you know how they do on around the horn? You get points. Yeah.

That's what I should have had. I should have had an ability to give you guys points. And you know who gets no points? You, Ian, you still haven't told us what you think.

It's not my job. As a moderator can't be biased. to get show any favoritism. Coward. So I just want to say thank you to Mr. Moderator and Buddy over there for this. I want to say this moderator is a coward and I have no respect for him whatsoever.

Now make your decision. Interesting. All right, Sean, have a great week and hopefully we'll get you on again real soon. Sounds good, guys. All right. Mr. Moderator has failed you apparently last. Mr. Coward.

Mr. Coward. Mr. Too Afraid to share his opinion on our podcast. My new nickname should be Colin Coward. That should be my podcast nickname. Hey, Mendez and Colin, Lazz and Colin Calvin. This is why, but this is why

everybody loves you, Ian, because you know how to play the politics here. Yeah, just right down the middle. Don't want to anger anybody. So, listen, we were talking with, we shaw on there about Craig Barubei landing in Toronto. And on the weekend, Rod Brindonmore also. And I don't think it was a surprise

any resigned in Carolina, but like, can we at least admit there was like a like a 1% little, hmm, this is interesting that, that, you know, he might not be back, right? Like there was a little bit of. Oh yeah, people in Carolina were worried about it. Like even with all the assurances that were out there, they were still worried because that's their guy, right?

Like Rod Brindamore is the most important person in the state of North Carolina sometimes, I think. And there was concern. And, you know, a five-year deal, you do not see five-year contracts handed out in the NHL very often. That just shows you how much goodwill Brindamore has earned with the hurricanes. So it's interesting, though, here we are towards the end of May. Like, you know, we only, you know, we're two-thirds of the way done the month.

And last, there are still, I'm going to call it a half-dozen coaching spots that are not quite settled. You have the LA Kings who have Jim Hiller, Jim Hiller, who is the interim coach, who might be retained, but they still haven't definitively said, Hiller's coming back. Columbus is an interesting one because they're waiting on a new general manager there,

and it's a new general manager comes in. Maybe he says, you know what? I got a coach in mind, Pascal Vincent. Thanks for your service, but you're up. So, like, those are two that are, they have coaches, but they're not firmed up. Then you have Seattle. San Jose,

Winnipeg, and New Jersey, all meeting head coaches here at the end of May. And then we're getting close to, okay, you got to get your guy in place. So I'm curious what you think about New Jersey and do you think it's a slam dunk that Sheldon Keefe? Like, because everyone said that they wanted to take a big swing, that they probably wanted a barouet.

They wanted somebody who's won, who's got a cup. They want to take that program at the next level. So looking at the little, list of available candidates, Todd McClellan, Dean Everson, Sheldon Keith. I mean, is it Keefe for you? I think it's probably if Keefe wants it, he gets it. You know, it's a question of whether Keith wants after being under that, you know, Toronto pressure cooker for so long, whether he wants to take a year off or anything like that. But I think you look around, if you're a coach, you know, there's so many jobs getting filled right now that there'll be a lot fewer of them

available next year in theory, because usually don't fire a coach after one year. So I think If Keith wants it, it's his. Usually here's where I would rail against retread coaches, but look at Dallas, look at New York, look at Florida, look at Vancouver, it's kind of working. The retread coach thing seems to be working pretty well. So much as I'd like to see, you know, more knoblocks, more Hillers, kind of get these opportunities,

it's kind of difficult to argue with the fact that proven winners are smart hires right now in the NHL, boring as I mean, who was excited about Peter LaViolette being hired is the Rangers coach. Literally nobody on the planet was excited about that. He's done a phenomenal job. And here he has the Rangers in the Eastern Conference finals. So there's security and there's safety if you're a GM and an owner in hiring a proven winner. Yeah. No, it's it's really interesting though that like we're basically about five weeks away from the draft. And when you're five weeks away from like at the draft,

you definitely want your head coach in place. Yeah. You got to know what your system is, what your whole philosophy is. Yeah. What's your. philosophy, all of that, and then you go right into free agency. And so it's, boy, it's, it's, it's interesting that we have that many uncertain spots at this, at this stage of the game. And New Jersey to me is the most interesting. Winnipeg, it feels like when you talk to people and you read Marat and you, like Scott Arniel is going to be elevated.

That's what it feels like, right? Yeah, I mean, like, Winnipeg would be a primo gig if it were truly available. I'm not really convinced it's truly available. But New Jersey, man, they get Dougie Hamilton back. You got Jack Hughes. You got Nico Heesh here. You need a goalie. You need a goalie and a coach.

But they feel like they're the closest to true contention. Like last year wasn't an aberration. Like this year, I feel, was more of the fluke. The team that they were last year, they can be that for a long time. That could be a really good job for someone in a very low-pressure market. Well, I'll tell you what, Let's bring the Vegas Golden Knights know all about changing out the head coach.

I'm surprised that Bruce Cassidy isn't in the hot seat, given the way they run that team. Let's bring in our pal Jesse Granger, as we always do on Mondays. Presentation of BetMGM, the exclusive betting partner with the athletic Jesse Granger. Let me ask you this first. Does Jesse Granger know what holiday it is in Canada? I do not. I have no clue. Zero.

I didn't even know. know it was a holiday in Canada. Well, happy Victoria Day to you, my friend. What is that? What is Victoria Day? It's the dead Queen of England from like 150 years ago. None of this makes any sense to me.

We have stupid holidays like that too. They all royally stupid holidays. Yeah. Well, listen, Jesse, we love getting you on here on Mondays. We chat about, you know, goaltending is obviously a great conversation piece at this stage of the came of Stanley Cup playoffs. And I'm really curious who you think has the edge in that Florida Rangers series

because you got a guy in Sergei Bobrovsky who, when he's on, he's unbelievable. You got Shasturkin who's been, at times, you know, Vezna caliber self. If you had to tell our listeners who's got the edge in net, is there one between Shisterkin and Bobrovsky right now? I mean, I think either of them could give their team the edge, but I think Schisturk, if you made me pick which one is going to have a better series, I would probably take Schisturkin just because he's, to me, in better form right now. I thought Bobrovsky played really well in the first round against Tampa.

Boston, he was good. It wasn't like he was bad in that series, but I didn't think he was the difference maker that Igor Shisterkin was for the Rangers in their series against Carolina. I thought he is looking as good as he's looked, Igor. He's so confident. He's doing all the details right. just think that over the second half of the season, he found his game. First half of the season,

Igor Shasturkin was bad. I mean, there was, there were points where we thought Jonathan Quick was going to take over like the starting gig for, for several weeks. And then he found his game. Over the second half of the season, he was arguably the best goal in the league. And he's just rolled that right into the playoffs. Obviously, Washington, they were like the 28th scoring team in the league. So he didn't have to do a lot against them in the first round, but I was so impressed by him against Carolina, a couple 50 save games. He's really informed. So I think both are very good goalies.

I think Bobrovsky could absolutely turn it on, but if I had to pick one, give me Igor. It's true. I mean, Schisturiken was bad for half the year. Ilya Sorokin lost the net for the playoffs in the Islanders. You've got a third string goalie on the verge of the Western Conference final in Vancouver. Jesse, is goaltending bullshit? It's here's the problem with goaltending. And I've been saying this.

The reason goaltending is voodoo, goaltending is bullshit, goaltending is, we can't figure it out, is because the statistics we use to judge goalies are terrible, terrible at judging goalies. They are a product of the play around them far more than they are the goalie themselves. And because the position relies so much on,

it's just a reaction to what's happening in front of it, it is so difficult to quantify. And I think like goals saved above expected, does it better than any statistic we have. But it's still terrible in comparison to, in my opinion, like the stats we have for skaters. I just think that if you watch a goalie play and just is he in position,

is he square to the puck, is he getting to his spots fast. I think that part of goaltending is consistent. I think goalies can be consistently good. The problem is a goalie can do everything right. the team in front of him doesn't. He gives up four goals in 15 shots and he's terrible, even if he didn't do anything wrong.

So that's a yes. Goaltening is bullshit. That's what you're saying. Yeah, that's right. We'll go with yes. Yeah. Or the short answer, yeah,

and we have no idea what we're doing. An archer C-loves, she loves is the greatest goalie to ever live. It is like, that's the crazy thing. It's like, yes, it's bullshit.

We can't predict it because it's so hard to, but also you can't just ignore it because it is like the most important factor in determining a champion. So, yes, it's wild. It's so bizarre. It's the most important position in all of sports. That includes quarterback. Like there's no position in sports that's more important than the goalie in hockey.

And we don't understand it. And it never makes any sense. And the stats why. And everything is just, it's just absurd how little, you know, you're a goalie. And sometimes I talk to you about gold telling you. I'm like, I don't think he even knows what he's talking about. Like, it's just like very difficult to predict. It's an absolute baffling position.

It's so true, right? Because you think about the NFL, like, you know, Tom Brady, Patrick Mahomes. Like, those are the quarterbacks that win Super Bowls, right? Can you just imagine some every year, there's some random second string quarterback? Yeah, Davido or whoever. Tommy DeVito, yeah. I don't think Tommy DeVito is a giant pretty time soon. Yeah, and you're like, well, they won the Super Bowl.

Wow, that makes sense. Like, it doesn't. Right. It doesn't make sense. It's wild because goalies are like quarterbacks in terms of, how important they are to determine which team wins. But they're treated like running backs, which are like the least important.

Like because we can't predict the goalies, they're treated like running backs. Ah, let's just do committee. If you lose your goalie, whatever, just pick some random guy up. Maybe he'll be great. And like, that's what teams do with running backs in the NFL, but running backs are the least important position.

It is a very, very strange position that makes no sense. And I love it so much. Well, I'll tell you what. You mentioned Archer's Shilovs, who has just been, he's authored one of the most unlikely, remarkable stories that we've seen from a goalie in a long time in the playoffs. I'm going to put you in Rick Tockett skates for a second here, or shoes, sorry. Let's say Vancouver wins. And again, we're recording this on Monday. So this could all be a moot point.

Archer Shilovs is brilliant. He's electric. He's dynamic in game. seven. They win game seven, Jesse. And just before game one against Dallas, Thatcher Demko goes to Rick Tockett says, coach, I'm good to go. I'm good to go. What do you do? What would you do if you were Rick Tocket? I think I would ride the the hot streak of Shilovs as long as I can. But with the notion and with the message to both players that if you cool down, we're going to Thatcher. I think Demko could use the extra couple days.

I think this is like even even if he says I'm good, it's like, well, if Sheelov stops 38 of 39 tonight and they win game seven, Shilov gets game one to me if he's brilliant tonight, if he's brilliant in game seven. And then if he stumbles, all it takes is one, we're going to Thatcher and,

and see what he, what level he's at. And you could always go back to Sheelovs if Demko's not himself. Like this is, we don't know exactly what he's dealing with, but it's going to be very difficult for Demco to step into a conference final and just be, boom, like the Thatcher Demco that we saw at the end of the year. So I would personally give Shilov the chance to hold on to the job. And you know that if at any moment you're not comfortable with him, you've got an all-star goalie ready to go. So Ian and I were talking about Dallas being probably a heavy favorite against either of these two teams up in Western Canada and Florida, New York.

Who's the favorite? What do the odds say right now? What does BEDMGM say the Stanley Cup odds are for the five remaining teams? Yeah. So the one thing is with these odds, the teams that haven't advanced are obviously going to be way longer odds, Oilers and Canucks just because they have to win the extra game tonight. So they're the two bottom, and that's partially because they're probably going to be the underdog to Dallas, but more so because they haven't advanced yet.

Let's see, the Canucks are 18 to 1. They're the longest odds. The Oilers are 5 to 1. And then you've got the other three that have ordered. advanced, right? Yeah. So pretty big favorite to win tonight for Edmonton. That's pretty wild on the road against the division champion. Wow, a division champion that somehow is cursed. I don't believe in curses or jinxes, but man, the Canucks are really testing me. That's this poor franchise. But the three teams that are that are at the top are all very

close. The stars are the favorites outright to win the cup at two to one plus 200. So you're not making much money betting on Dallas right now. The Panthers are right behind. them at plus 220. So 2.2 to 1. And then the Rangers plus 320 right behind them, 3 to 1. So all three very close in terms of the betting market. And I got to think if Edmonton wins, they seem to be a betting darling, but probably because of the McDavid dry saddle factor, they'd probably be right up there with Dallas.

I think that's going to wind up being a relatively even odd series, even though most of us are looking at that as Dallas being a significant favorite. Yeah, I think Dallas will be the favorite, but not as big as like the teams like feeds or standings would suggest. I think it will be closer than that. Well, I'll tell you what, Jesse, before we let you go and wrap up the Monday pot, I want to ask you to weigh in on something. Laz and Sean McIndoo had a really, we'll call it spirited debate in the middle of this

podcast about video review for goaltender interference. And this, of course, from what happened in the Dallas-Colado game, And look, just to put boil this into very simple terms, McIndoo's point is, and he wrote about this in the Athletic Today, time to get rid of video review for goal interference. For everything. He wants to get rid of it for everything. Yeah.

All of it. Offside. But in particular, a goalie review is because of, you know, what happened with Matthew Shane again and Dallas and Colorado. Generally speaking, how do you feel about video review for goalie interference, Jesse, as our goalie resident goalie expert, Do you see an argument for getting rid of video review for goalie interference at all? I mean, I don't think I would argue that I want it gone, but I totally understand why people

want it gone because they can't get it right. So to me, what I would prefer is I would prefer to keep the review and just make the rules more black and white. I think there's too much gray area in the written, the way they have the goalie interference rules written. You can watch a situation, read the rules, and then point to one part of the rule that says, it is absolutely goalie interference. And then the next sentence in the rule shows you that it isn't goal interference.

So it basically leaves it up to like I really, really dislike the way that rule is written. I think if you made it more black and white say if a skater touches the blue paint and makes contact with the goalie, it's goalie. It's goalie interference, period. If you're pushed into them, I don't care. It's your responsibility to not go into the goalie. They have to make it to me or write it a different way. If there's contact with the with the defenseman, it can't be goal interference. If there's any contact with your defenseman pushing the guy into him.

So to me, if they made the rule more black and white, I would be fine with the review. And I think it would be a lot easier to whether coaches want to challenge it. Because right now, I feel like coaches are just blindfolded throwing darts at the like, we'll see if I get it or not. I think if we wrote the rule a little better, a little clearer, more black and white, I would be okay with the review. But if they're not going to and they're going to keep the rule the way, it is. I think I agree. Let's get rid of it because the other part of it, and this isn't just a

hockey thing. It's it happens in football more than any sport. But when you do the ultra, ultra, ultra, slow mo for the offside or for the goal review, to me, it's like almost, yes, you're trying to get it exactly right. But it's also like, how do we keep the spirit of like the gate? Like once you slow it down, it looks nothing like the play when it was live. I think a lot of these reviews would be better if they weren't able to slow them down. Look, if you want to look at the the play again, do it. Get three different angles, all full speed, game speed. If you think it was goal interference, call it. Or if you think it was offside, call it. If you can't tell at live speed, then it wasn't offside. Like, if we need to, to slow it down to one frame, then it wasn't

offside because you wouldn't have called that live. These are human beings calling the game. I think live reviews would, or sorry, game speed reviews would be better than the ultra slow-mo sometimes. Interesting. That's an interesting. It's an interesting concept. I've not heard that one before. I like that idea, though. Yeah. And like,

it's like with catches in football, that's to me the one that's like, they like slow it down. Like did he bobble it? Like, can't we just watch it? And did the guy catch the football or not? Like, it's a pretty simple thing.

Like I don't, and like same with the goal of interference. I think a lot of it. If we didn't slow it down so much, I think it would be easier, not harder. Well, we decided that instant Twitter polls is the best way to go here with every review.

Yes. So the largest fan base gets every call. Throw it up there and fans, fans just get to vote within, five minutes. That would really incentivize teams to increase their fan bases. Right. Vancouver Canucks suddenly are just winning every review. Tocke just challenges every goal.

Yeah. Are there any Canucks fans who don't live on Twitter 24-7? My God. I don't know what's worse. Connucks Twitter if they win or lose game seven. I don't know. I love those guys. Do you remember the old Twitter account? L.O.L. Vancouver.

Yeah. You just retweet angry Canucks fans for like for like a decade. It was like the absolute greatest Twitter feed of all time. I love Kinnux fans. I love their passion. They are ridiculous people and I love them for it. Yeah. The funny, and I grew up in Vancouver,

the weirdest thing about Vancouver is like when you think about the West Coast, what do you think about? I think about chill. You think about relax. You think, right? That's the West Coast. They don't have that vibe around their hockey team. It's so funny.

The paradox is amazing, right? Yeah, it is. That's like the epicenter of pot use in North America, too. You really think they would be chill up there. They're just, yeah, seem really tense is all. They seem really tense. Only when it comes to the hockey team, can you blame them? Yeah, 50 years of this, 50, whatever, 54 years.

So anyway, listen, Jesse, as always, appreciate you dropping by the Monday podcast. And guys, we've got to let everybody know that next week, it's not the Monday edition of the athletic hockey hockey. show, heaven forbid, we work on an American holiday. We're going to move to Tuesday. You know. There's that passive, aggressive Canadians.

I love that. I love it. Vancouver coming through. Exactly. So next week, because it's Memorial Day on Monday, we're going to punt the athletic hockey show to Tuesday. And obviously, we'll be in the thick of the second, sorry, the third round of the Stanley Cup playoffs.

but there's no respect for Queen Victoria. Where am I going to be? I'm not going to be in Edmonton or Vancouver. I can't wait to find out tonight. I guess, yeah, that's the point of the series. It'll be up in Canada. Yeah, we'll see how the Wi-Fi is. Okay, well, and look for that Boston pizza commercial that I mentioned.

I'm already afraid of it. Do you guys get SGA and Chet Holmgren doing the Whata Pro wants up there? Or is that just... Yeah, we get it if the game is on... The odd time there's games on ABC, right? Yeah. Yeah, so I've seen that stupid song. Oh, God, that's so bad.

900 times I've seen that commercial between the NBA and the NHL playoffs. I feel like they might have banned it, though, because the other night I was watching a game and I was like, I haven't seen that commercial in like more than 24 hours. And my brain, like, couldn't comprehend. Maybe they finally got the end. I think they just shut it down. Okay, well, we'll leave it there. I want to thank everybody for listening to this Monday edition of the Athletic Hockey Show. Leave us a five-star rating and review.

If you're enjoying the show, we would certainly appreciate that. Reminder, next week, Lazan and I are back on Tuesday. We're going to take the Monday off, and your next edition of the Athletic Hockey Show will come your way on Wednesday. It's Sean McIndoo, Sean Gentile, and as I'd like to call him, F. Sean Carrado. Those three will be back at it on Wednesday.