The Athletic Hockey Show - The Battle of Alberta starts with a bang and other observations from Round 2 of NHL Playoffs, potential coaches for the Golden Knights

Episode Date: May 19, 2022

Ian and Sean discuss Game 1 of the Battle of Alberta on Wednesday night that was completely unhinged with fifteen goals scored. Is that game indicative of what we will get the rest of the series, or a one-off? Also, if the Rangers already in trouble in their series against the Hurricanes, and if the Blues have any chance against the Avalanche.Then in "Granger Things", Jesse Granger is back to discuss the Golden Knights' firing of coach Pete DeBoer and the potential candidates to replace him, and looks at some early scoring trends for Round 2. Then, Ian and Sean discuss the Panthers- Lightning series, and wrap up with a dive into the listener mailbag and "This Week in Hockey History".Have a question for Ian and Sean? Email [e-mail] or leave a VM @ [phone]!Save on a subscription to The Athletic: theathletic.com/hockeyshow Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

We are back. It is your Thursday edition of the Athletic Hockey Show. Ian Mendez, very happy to be back in the Thursday time slot, alongside Sean McIndoo. And boy, we got a lot to get into. In fact, I almost feel like we can spend the entire podcast. Just talking about Game 1 of Edmonton, Calgary, but we'll certainly hit on Florida, Tampa, St. Louis, Colorado.

Did the Rangers squander a game one opportunity there? we'll hit on all of that stuff kind of opening up round two. We'll hit Sean on your column, your mailbag column there about the Toronto Maple Leafs. We'll hit on a couple of things like that. Jesse Granger for Granger Things is back. We got some fun email questions, some This Week in Hockey History, which of course will hit on some playoff moments. But I'll tell you, it feels like, Sean, that we could spend 45 minutes.

dissecting game one, Edmonton, Calgary. Now, you and I both live in the Eastern time zone, and I'm going to be very transparent with our audience here. At 5-1 Calgary, I was like, I think I'm done. I'm going to go to bed. You know what? I stayed up late for Colorado, St. Louis, the overtime game the other night.

I don't need to be running myself into the ground this early in the playoffs, and I fortunately stuck around. Did you consider at 5-1? maybe check it out or were you in? Yeah, I thought about it. And I did stick around, but I got a long drive ahead of me today. So I was saying I can't do the whole game. And please don't let it be overtime.

And then, yeah, it's 5'1. You go, okay, good. You know, I was hoping for a little closer game. And then, boy, the oil is just kept chipping back and stripping back. And it was, I mean, that's what you build on. if you're Edmonton, right? You say we were out of this game and we fought all the way back on the road in a tough building, lit up their All-Star goaltender who's supposed to give them such a big edge of net.

You know, that's the kind of stuff you can build on, but it's going to feel a little bit hollow. But that, I mean, that was a great game, man. I mean, we're in the era these days where every movie, every TV show from our youth gets remade. And, you know, when you remake a 30-year-old classic, I don't want to see the updated version of it. I want to see, give me what I grew up with. And that's exactly what they did. They didn't take the Battle of Alberta. We've been waiting 30 years for the sequel.

They didn't take it and turn it into like the 2022 version where it's three to two and all of this stuff. No, we went right back to the mid-80s. And it was wild. And it was great. And apologies in advance to all the I love defense freaks out there. who had to sit through that. But the other 99.9% of us thought it was absolutely amazing entertainment. You know, it's funny that you say this was kind of like,

hey, this is like a back to the old school 80s. So I looked this up, okay? And I was, you tell me if you're surprised by this. So obviously we had 15 goals in game one, Calgary Adventin, 9, 6, 15 goals. First of all, do you know what the last time, and maybe you saw this, I didn't see this anywhere on Twitter. Do you know the last time we had a 15 goal? playoff game was?

I don't know. And now I'm trying to think, because the one that always sticks in my mind is, and boy, did it even get to 15? The really crazy Sabre Senators game. Was that 7-6? That was 7-6. Okay. Boy, 15.

Yeah. Did we go back to the 80s for that? Because... So, no, no, but you're right. So I looked this up. A couple things. The last time we had a playoff game in which both teams scored six goals,

was that crazy unhinged Ottawa Buffalo game from 2006. That was a 7-6 game. But I was like, man, when's the last time there was 15 goals in a game? Because that seems like... Did the Pittsburgh Philadelphia series from 10 years ago get up to there? No, you would have thought Brezgallov on his own would have given up 15 in the game. Yeah, maybe. Or flurry.

But no, no, none of those. You got to go all the way back to 1993. opening round L.A. Calgary. And it was a nine, six game there. But here's what surprised me. I should have known. Anytime you're talking about when was the last time something good happened in 1993. That's the go-to season.

That's awesome. All right. So what was it that surprised you? This is what surprised me. There's only been six games in playoff history that have had. had 15 goals. Does that not seem weird to you? It does.

I would have thought in the 80s it would have been like, oh, you know, there was six every year or something like that, you know? Yeah, that is a lot lower than I would have thought. I mean,

playoffs are different in a few ways. I mean, you don't, obviously the real bad teams. And back in the, you know, in the 80s, there were some really legitimately bad teams.

And in the 70s, they don't make the playoffs. so you don't get to beat them up. Teams tend not to want to run up the score if it's a blowout. And obviously you don't get too many of those eight to seven games. But yeah, no, I would have thought we'd get a few more than that, just because like you said, that that's smite division, the running gun, the talent that was in there,

they were used to play in those types of games. Yeah. So anyway, like, based on what I've looked up here, the only other times that we've had 15 goals in a in a playoff game, obviously Wednesday night, Calgary admitted 9-6. L.A. Calgary, 1993, 9-6. You might know, I feel like you've written about this game, or at least this series.

Pittsburgh, Philly, 1989, 10-7. Pittsburgh beat Philly 10-7. I think Mario Lemieux went off in that game, right? You know what? I'm going to go ahead and say he did. Yeah. It feels like Rob Brown may have gone off too. Yeah.

So, okay. So that's another game. Edmonton, L.A., in that crazy miracle on Manchester series in 1982, had an opening game that ended with a 10-8 L.A. victory, which I believe is the record for most goals in a playoff game. Minnesota, Boston in the 80s, 1981, had a 9-6 game. And then the only other game that I could find, fine that went to 15 goals, I believe, was Chicago and in Montreal an 8-7 game?

I think that might be it. Like, at least these are based on both teams scoring six goals. So, I mean, I guess there's a chance, like maybe Chicago and Edmonton had a crazy series during the 80s. Was there a game where there was like 11 to 5 or something? Like, you know what? There could have been because that series holds the, that Edmonton, Chicago 86 series holds a record for most goals in a series.

And it didn't even go seven games. They were, but they also had a 12-9 game, but that was the regular season, I think, after that. Yeah. So anyway, go back and look at that. I could only find, anyway, there's only a handful of games that got to where we got yesterday. Now, here's my question. Is this a sign of what we can expect or an aberration?

Like, and I'm not saying we're going to get nine, six, but like, should we expect five, 4, 63, or what are we expecting here? I mean, I think certainly it wouldn't be shocking to see the overcorrection for game two, right? I mean, this is typically the way it goes in the NHL. Everybody sits down for game two going on. I can't wait for more of that. And then the two teams play it out cautious and it ends up being two to one. But that said, there's a ton of offensive talent in this series.

on both teams. Very spread out and balanced on Calgary, at least more so than Edmonton, where it's two guys in the complete upper elite and then some question marks. Big question marking goal for the Oilers. Edmonton fans know that. They're sick of hearing about it,

but we've been saying that all season. Calgary, you figured they were all set with Jacob Markstrom, but if he plays, you know, if he's going to hit a rough patch and goalies do that. Goleys go cold sometimes. If he gets a cold, boy, now we're looking at the potential for some real big numbers. So, yeah, I mean, let's see where it goes. Obviously, we're not going to see nine to six and that sort of thing very much in this series. But this could absolutely be a five-four series and great if it is.

that would be that would be real entertaining and you know i the metaphor i keep going back to it i saw quite a few people mentioned something like this with calgary they play that series against dallas against jay gotinger it's it's like swinging the bat in the on deck circle with the weight on it right and then you and then you bang the weight off and you step in and you get to take some real cuts and you feel like superman because you know now you're that's that's got to be what it feels like uh going against this oilers team that look uh I mean, we know this is not a great defensive team. This is not a team with great goaltending.

And this is not a team that's necessarily afraid to go back and forth. I mean, like every other coach in the last 20 years, Jay Woodcroft doesn't want his team trying to win six to five. But the Oilers are not a team where if it ends up being a back and forth track meet, that they're going to shrink from that. So, you know, there are some pieces in place for us to see stuff like this again. And nothing to the extreme we just saw, but it's going to be a fun series. And I can't wait to see how it plays out.

You know what? I was thinking about this earlier, too, because I was thinking about the metaphor, because you're right. Calgary and Dallas played one of the most dry, dull, boring series, right, that we've seen in recent history. Like, it was low scoring, tight checking. It was most, it was boring to start with. I think that was fair. It did get better. Yeah.

It got, the last half of that series, I thought was, even though it was still mostly low scoring, I thought that, that, that, turned into a real good series. But the first couple of games were awful. Yeah, we're just awful and dry and boring. And I was thinking about this today because the flames, like you said, they almost went from one extreme to the other, okay? And I was thinking about this. They get to stick with me on this analogy, because I'm going to take you on a bit of a ride. But just just see if you can follow my logic here. Are you, first of all, are you familiar with the Amish term rum spring up? I've heard that word before, but I do not know what it means. Okay.

So from what I gather, Rum Spring is like when these kids who are in the Amish community, and they've lived obviously a very kind of quiet life. When they turn a certain age, I think it's either 16 or 18, they get set free. And they get to go out and kind of indulge in secular life. And then they have to make a decision. Do I want to live, you know, in that kind of free? wheeling, no-holds-barred environment, or do I want to return and live a more kind of pious, quiet life? I feel like the Calgary Flames had a little bit of the rum spring out here,

okay? It's like they left the quiet Dallas Star Series, and then they play Edmonton. They're like, what is this? Like, this is crazy. But now Daryl Sutter is like trying to get everybody back onto the farm. And he's like, get back here. And I feel like if I was a player, I'd be like, but this was so much fun. I want to buy, I want this, you know. That is,

that is the best Amish metaphor that I've ever heard for, for the Stanley Cup playoffs. Yeah. And Darrell, and so, I mean, he had that great line last night about how people said that the last series was boring.

So he told them to score nine goals. And, uh, but you're right. I mean, I, uh, I don't know.

I, it's, it's not often in the playoffs that you can win game one by three goals and get bag skated the next day. But I'm curious to see what that Calgary practice looks like because that is not Daryl Sutter hockey, let's just say, to give up that many goals, especially blowing a lead the way that they did. So they, you know, there are some areas of concern there for Calgary.

And like I say, the game two being the two one nail biter would not surprise me at all. But, you know, at the same time, hopefully both of these teams go, look, man. half this game is scoring goals and half of it is preventing them. And we just show we can score on these guys. So let's go out and do it. I double-checked with the NHL. The Calgary Flames still get credit for a win, even though they gave up a lot of goals because they got more than the other team.

Apparently, that's the important thing. So let's hope that if they got a little taste of it, maybe they push back and keep going with it. All right. Listen, like I said, we can probably spend a lot of time just talking about Edmonton and Calgary, but there are three other series that are underway as well. I'll talk about that, that Ranger Carolina series, Sean,

because I kind of felt like the Rangers for 57 minutes or at least for 40 minutes and then they were three minutes away from winning. They were ready to steal one and now I can't help but feel like, I don't know, I feel like Carolina woke up. I don't want to call a series too early and just say, you know what, it's over and this is where they lost the series. But just the way that they lost that game, I don't love the Rangers chances now. Yeah, in a way, it's sort of, it was very similar to the Blues Avalanche game in that

you're looking at it going, everybody's picking one team, everyone's picking the favorite. And despite the fact that the other team is a very good team and, you know, their fans can sit there and say we're being disrespected and all of that. But on paper, it should be, there's a clear advantage. Road team goes in game one and hangs with them and gives them everything they can handle, even though, yeah, it's a little bit of goal tending. You know, it's a little bit obviously in the Colorado game. Yeah, they kept hitting the post.

But you're sitting there as a road team going, we can steal this one. And then that resets the expectations for the whole series. And then you end up in overtime and you lose. the game in overtime. And on the one hand, you're sitting there going, hey, everybody said that, you know, we don't have a chance. We just showed we have a chance. We just, we hung with them. The game was as close as it could be. The flip side is when you're an underdog, you've got to steal a few. And when you have the opportunity to do it, when it's sitting right there, your goal is playing great. The bounces are maybe going your way. And you don't get it done.

That is tough. That is a, that is a real tough one. With the, with the Rangers, I mean, at least in that game, you're looking at it. You're not saying, it's not like the hurricanes were great for three periods and Sturkin just kept them in and, you know, tried to steal it for them. The Rangers were the better team in that game for the first two periods pretty clearly. And to do that on the road against teams good as Carolina, you're happy with that. You'll take it, but you want to win. And now you really want to split because you don't want to be going back home. down to nothing.

Obviously, the way the Pittsburgh series went, if you're the Rangers, you're not counting yourselves out. You know, you can make the late push like they did against Pittsburgh, but this is, this Carolina team is not Pittsburgh. And you're at some point, if you're the Rangers, you're probably going to have to steal a couple,

and they had it right there for them to do it and just couldn't get it done. And like you said, I think the Rangers can at least hang their hat on the fact that for 40 minutes they were the better team, wasn't like they're like you said, it wasn't like Schusterkin and the power play carried them. They were pretty even for 40 minutes.

So they could probably go after that game. Gerard Galant can say, you know what, guys, let's regroup. I don't know what Craig Barube does, though, Sean, heading into game two because it's a different way. The way St. Louis lost game won and overtime was far different. And I mean, really, that game should have been Colorado by four or five goals. Jordan Bittington went full 2019 version of Jordan Bittington. I mean, is there any way you see this series lasting beyond five games at this juncture?

You know, I've been guilty of not giving the Blues enough credit this season really from the beginning. So I don't want to sit there and say, you know, what, this one's done. It's over. It's, you know, what have you. And when it comes to Jordan Bennington playing as well as he did, hey, goaltending is part of the game. Goaltending is part of your team. So, you know, if he's going to play like that, not just for game one, but if, you know, if he's going to be hot in this series, then that is, that is part of the breakdown of how the series is going to play out. So, you know, if you're the blues, you're sitting there going, look, forget about hitting the post.

The goalposts are just shots that were going wide. Forget about our goalie did this or that. We went to overtime with this team that was supposed to be unbeatable. And we were one more bounce away from beating them. And when it comes to the avalanche, we know the recent history, especially in the second round. Remember, they were up to nothing against Vegas last year. And everybody was already right in our avalanche finally breakthrough pieces.

And then it fell apart. So you know that if you can put a little bit of doubt in their minds, maybe that kind of takes seed and turns into something. So I'm not counting the blues out. But this is a really, really tough match. Colorado is just so good. They're playing so well right now. And it's one of those where just the nature of hockey is that you're going to get the occasional

opening to steal a game. and you got to get almost all of them. And the blues had in game one. And unfortunately for them couldn't close it out. You know, as I was watching that series and seeing Eric Johnson, of course, plays for the avalanche, up against the blues, I thought, oh, that's interesting. Like, I never even thought of it that guy that was taken first overall

by St. Louis is now playing against the blues. I thought, well, how often has this happened? As you know, you and I love our little kind of trivia and, you know, quirky facts and anecdotes or whatever. So I decided to look it up, Sean, and thought, like, how many times has a player been drafted first overall and then later in his career ended up playing against that team in a playoff series? And it's really rare. Now, I mean, listen, the function of that is the Crosby's, the Ovechkins, the Pat Caines, the Lemieux, like, they don't move teams often, right? The last 10 years, I think, I think Neil Yakopov is the last number one pick to play for a different team than the one that drafted him. Yeah. So again, so there's a little bit of rarity to this. But I looked it up all the way back to the original, well, I guess to the start of the modern day draft in 1968. Okay. And there are only from what I could find four instances where a guy was taken first overall like Eric Johnson.

and he ended up playing against his draft team later in his career in the playoffs. Which is, I don't know, it's kind of weird, but I just want to know if you have any educated guesses on who those players might be outside of Eric Johnson. Yeah, so I'm looking at, how many did you say? Four in total. Okay. And there's one other one that is technically yes, but I'll explain why it's not really.

Okay. Boy, okay. So I'm looking at a list of the number one overall picks. And yeah, so many of them don't actually move. The one, when you mentioned this to me earlier, the one that I threw at you that I felt pretty good about that you shot down for me was Brian Barard, who was picked by the Ottawa senators, but ended up bouncing the islanders and then the Toronto Maple Leafs. And I figured he maybe got in on one of those Battle of Ontario's. But apparently, not. He missed that by one year, if I understand it. So, no, he was on the Leafs team in 2000 that played Ottawa, but I believe that was the year that he had the eye injury, right? That was the host of high stick year. Which happened in the regular season. So he didn't play in the playoffs and then he never played a playoff game against Ottawa. Okay. So other than that, I'm going to,

I'm going to throw a few at you where I just, I know a guy moved around a little bit. Yeah, that's your best bet. And, and that's my best bet. I'm going to start. I'll stay with Ottawa. Did Alexander Dague ever end up playing the Ottawa senators in the playoffs? He did not, but here's a weird Dague fact that I uncovered while researching this. Alex Dague played 12 career playoff games. All of them were against the Buffalo Sabres. Oh, wow. Okay.

It's kind of weird, right? Yeah. He only plays Buffalo. So he was still in Ottawa for that first series. Yeah. And then I think it was Philadelphia. Philadelphia, yeah. Yeah.

And then they played Buffalo. And that was it. So Alex Degne never played Ottawa. The two others that jumped to mind is Pierre Turgeon. Did he ever get back to play Buffalo in the playoffs? No, he didn't. You know, he was obviously with the Islanders and the Habs and whatever, but no, never played Buffalo in the playoffs.

Okay. And then the other one was Joe Murphy, who was picked by Detroit. And I know he was in Chicago for quite a few years. So that Norris Division, did that ever serve up that matchup? Yeah, two times. Joe Murphy played against Detroit in the playoffs with St. Louis in 1997 and with Chicago in 1995. So you're right.

Yeah, Joe Murphy. And listen, I'll just give you the other ones because they're really hard. Are we going back? Yeah, we're probably going back away. Let me ask you this. Is there any since Joe Murphy? Yeah. There's one.

There's one post Joe Murphy. Post Joe Murphy. Okay. I'm running down the list here. So it's not Madano, not Sunday. wouldn't be Owen Nolan, Lindros, did they play Quebec? No, but I'll tell you what.

Okay. Owen Nolan, Owen Nolan is the kind of asterisk one in that he played against Colorado. Colorado, yes. But that doesn't really count. But Owen Nolan two times with San Jose played Colorado, but of course he was drafted by Quebec. Yes, okay.

Okay. All right, we did dig. I mean, Roman Hammer, bounced around. There you go. Is that the guy? Okay, I couldn't even name you all Roman Hammerlick's teams, but. Roman Hammerlick played against Tampa as a member of the Islanders in a playoff series.

I, you just said, like, that sentence was like eight words long and contained three different things I have no recollection of. Like, don't remember Roman Hammerlick as an Islander. I do not remember the Islanders ever played the Lightning in the playoffs. That is, I'm going to trust you on that. that one, but wow. Okay. Yeah, I would not have got that one. I think it was 2000. It might have been the, was it their cup run? I don't have to double check it, but I think 2004. Yeah. Could have been. Yeah. And then the other one, this is really random. Okay. Yeah. Okay. It's a 70s draft pick. Billy Harris got taken first overall by the LA Kings. Oh, sorry,

by the New York Islanders. Uh-huh. And then later played against the Islanders as a member of LA Kings. Okay. When did that happen? Was that the Bucch? Was that the Butch Goring trade year? Yeah. Okay. Yeah. All right. Do you remember when like when I hear people complain about while you know, you can't do one to 16 in the playoffs because, you know, what if your first round matchup is like Vancouver against the Devils? Yep. I invite you to go back to 1980 when the Islanders and the Kings played each other in a first round, I think it was a preliminary series, and we're taking commercial flights. Like, come on.

Yep, that was the, the NHL did that for, I think it was only two years after the, the WHA teams came in. And it was typical NHL. They were just sort of like, well, there's a problem. What's the easiest possible solution? And they went with the one through 16. And yeah, that would have been a little bit dice. But yeah, I forgot that.

that the butch, because Billy Harris was obviously in the butch-goring trade and that we all remember as the almost the platonic trade deadline acquisition. But they, those two teams played each other in the, in the first round. So that is, that is a good one. But I would have never got that. Because if anyone is like, if you're a draft watcher, if you look at first round picks, everything before Merrill Lemieux is either a superstar who played, who. made the Hall of Fame with one team or some journeyman where you're like, what?

Why was this? Was there even like, were there just no prospects that year? What happened? Dale McCourt? Yeah. Yeah. It is. Greg Jolly.

Yeah. Yeah. Who are these guys? So who's the? So those are the four. Okay. That was it. Eric Johnson.

Roman Hammerlick, Joe Murphy, Billy Harris. If you want to really stump your friends, actually, scratch that. If you want to lose your friends. Yeah, that's it. Yeah. That's the trivia question you asked them. A guy taken first overall to play against his old team later on. Eric Johnson, Roman Hammer, like Joe Murphy, Billy Harris.

And tragically, we never did get Gila Fleur playing against Montreal. Imagine if like with the Nordiques, oh my goodness, that would have just been, that would have been game over. But not to be. All right. Time for a little greater things. Brought to you by BetMGM, the exclusive betting partner with us at the Alabama. Athletic Granger Things means our pal Jesse Granger is back in the mix. Listen, I heard you did a great job sitting in the co-host seat last week.

And really, you were the pilot. You were the pilot of this. He did a good job. In fact, when I was asked afterwards if I would commit to a starter for next time out, I said, you know what, we're going to keep it close to the vest. But the podcast watchers did notice that in practice, Ian was at the starters mic. So that kind of gave it away. Yeah, this feels like we got a Mike Smith-Koskinen situation with us.

The two of us were not sure. Oh, well, I hope not. Geez, I mean, guys, go easy on yourself. Holy smokes. Yeah. But hey, listen, Jesse, the team that you cover, the Vegas Golden Knights were certainly in the news cycle this week. And look, we talked about it with you a few weeks ago.

We're like, man, it was hard to envision a scenario where the trifecta of Kelly McCriman, Pete the Boar, Robin Lennar, all came back. Like, it just felt like something was wrong. wrong. And if we were laying odds down, we're like, one of those three wasn't going to come back. We know for sure it's DeBoer. So where do we go from here? And I know you've written about this, but like, who are the names that are being bandied about in Vegas as a potential replacement for Pete DeBoer? Yeah. I mean, so to kind of start on the expectations, I think I agree with you. We all kind of expected that one of, there would be some changes made in Vegas. What, what surprised me was on

locker cleanout day two weeks ago, talking to Kelly McCriman, talking to Pete DeBore, talking to the players, there was one unified message that had clearly been discussed by pretty much everyone in the organization. And that was the fact that they were blaming this season on injuries. They, so, so then to turn around and fire the coach is, is a little odd to me. And Kelly wouldn't really give a reason for firing Pete. Obviously, that's partially just the human element. He doesn't want to pile on critiques on a guy that coached his team for three years. But I was a bit surprised that they fired Pete after they basically exonerated everyone of all blame this season, basically just putting it on the injuries, which I think is not exactly reality. But that's what they ended up with. They ended

up firing Pete DeBore. I think my opinion on it is I think Pete's a really good coach. I think Pete has a good system, but I don't know if they were the best match for the Golden Knights. I think their players maybe need a different offensive system to be a little more free and score a little more goals when it really matters. In terms of who they're looking at, it's funny because like Barry Trots is the first name that everyone jumps to. And in most cases, in hockey or sports in general, usually that's not the name that everyone immediately goes on Twitter and says, this is the guy they should hire. That never happens. But this is the Vegas Golden Knights. This is the same team. that the moment they lost to Montreal, everyone said, well, I guess they're trading for Jack Eichel next year.

And that's exactly what they did. And everyone said they were going to sign Alex Petrangelo and free agency. And that's exactly what they did. So this team has constantly gone big game hunting. They've constantly gone after the, I guess, the obvious choice as to what most people think should happen. So I would not be surprised at all if Barry Trots ends up being the guy. Part of me, though, says, look, you fired a really good coach in Pete DeBore, who has, like I said, a good system that didn't really fit your team, and he couldn't get the power play going, and he couldn't, the offense didn't flow as well. The defense was very structured and very good. They allowed the fewest goals in the league last year. So to fire him and then hire another really good coach,

who is also a defensive-minded coach, who doesn't have a great power play, feels a little weird to me. So while Barry Trots, I think he might be the best coach out there, I think he's, I think To me, it feels too similar to Pete. I think if you're going to hire Barry Trots, you might have just been better off keeping Pete DeBore. But who knows, that might be the direction they go. I think everyone's looking at a lot of the former coaches. I think Rick Tockett would be a good fit here.

John Tortorella, I don't know, but he's a name that I've heard a lot. A couple guys that I've liked to kind of throw around out there that aren't maybe as on the radar, but I think are out-of-the-box picks that would be a breath of fresh air. Kelly McCrimmon mentioned he thinks this team needs a new voice. He thinks this four-month off-season is going to be good for this team to get recharged after four long playoff runs. And a guy named Ricard Grownberg, who ran the Swedish hockey team for a long time. And to me, is one of the biggest influences in the rise of Swedish hockey over the last 10, 15 years. He's a great player personnel guy in terms of scouting and choosing players.

He's great in terms of, I think he has very progressive systems and philosophies, which would be something that's, to me, welcomed in the NHL. I'd love to see a fresh coach with fresh ideas. There is a risk there. I mean, he's never coached on small ice. He's never coached in North America since he was an assistant in college. So I do think there's risks there, but that one's interesting. And then the one I really like, and I'd like to get Sean's thoughts mostly on this, is Spencer Carberry, because he's a guy who won the ECHL coach of the year, took a team that hadn't won and turned him into a playoff team. Then he goes to the AHL, wins AHL coach of the year, took him to the Herschy bears to playoffs comes to Toronto. They had a middling power play despite having a ton of talent, which to Vegas

fans sounds so familiar, so much offensive talent, but they can't score. He gets to Toronto, and not only were they the best power play in the league, they were the fourth best power play since 1990 in Toronto. Their power play was phenomenal. And from what I hear, he was a huge part of it. He ran that power play most of the year. So to me, he's a young coach who succeeded at all levels. He has a specialty in power play, which is the Golden Knight's biggest weakness. There is a risk in hiring a coach who has literally coached one season in the NHL as an assistant and handing that guy, a team expected with a Stanley Cup. But I think he's an out-of-the-box choice who I think deserves at least some consideration.

What do you think about Carberry, Sean? It's an interesting one. I mean, the first thing I got to point out is the power play was excellent in the regular season and then it didn't do anything in the playoffs and that was a big part of the reason why they lost. You're right. I mean, this is a situation where we always say coaching in NHL, it feels like it's an old boys club.

It feels like it's the same name cycling in and out and getting some new blood in there, some fresh ideas is often probably an efficiency that team should look at. I would see a guy like that as being more somebody that maybe goes to a rebuilding team where Right. And versus going to Vegas where all the pressure is on you. And it's just, you know, and you got to win right now. And look, Gerarica Lange got fired by this team. We're still not sure why.

So, you know, to go in as a young guy like that, that would be tough. And by the way, I had to laugh because as you were describing the coaching change, literally at that moment, the news breaks in the NHL, the Geraricillan has been nominated for the Jack Adams this year. So that is a tough one. But yeah, you're right. I mean, think outside the box a little bit, but with Vegas, it does so often tend to be the big name that you expect. I got to say, I got one of the comment, and then I have just a quick question for you, back to Barry Trots. My comment is, man, there is a very sick part of me that wants to see John Tortorella have to stand behind a bench and watch a night fight with laser beams against, you know, against a big crack in or whatever.

Yeah. sit there and pretend like he's into that. One quick question is that, you know, with Peter DeBoer, one of the things hanging over all of this was the Robin Lennar's situation. Lennar obviously was under Barry Trots for one year with the Islanders. Do we have any sense, like how that went? Did they like each other? I mean, he had a good year.

But then he left for Chicago and then on to Vegas. I wonder how that plays in. Or do you think Kelly McCriman couldn't care less what his goalie thinks? And he's going to pick the best coach and then work the rest of it out later. Yeah, I think it's probably more likely the latter. I don't think Kelly cares what his goalie thinks of the coach. I think this management has proven that they make the decision. And we even ask Kelly, like, are there dates that you have in mind that you would like to get a coach before?

Does it matter to you if you have your coach before free agency and the draft? And he shut it down real quick and said, absolutely not. He's like, we probably will have a coach before then, but it does not matter whatsoever. So it's, we're making the decisions. They'll coach the players we give them. The players will be coached by the coach we give them. In terms of Trots and Lennar, I haven't spoken with Robin about it, but I have to imagine there was a pretty good relationship there.

Obviously, that was the best season of Robin's career. He won the Vesina, or sorry, he was a Vezina finalist and won the Jennings trophy that year, allowing the fewest goals in the league at that tandem. He did leave after that, but I think that was more of. of a Lou Lamarillo was was kind of moving on from him and and wanted to bring in Varlamov to have that Russian connection with his goalies. So I don't think necessarily we can read much into him leaving after it. I think, like I said, I think Trots is a good coach. I think he would do really well in Vegas. And I agree with you that while I like to bring up those

out-of-the-box ideas, just because I think those names should be circulated in these in these conversations. I fully expect the Golden Knights to hire an NHL coach with previous NHL coaching experience and probably one of those big names, whether it's Tocet, Torts, trots, one of those guys, just because it's hard to justify to Bill Foley to me. Bill Foley's an aggressive owner who does everything he can to win. I think if you're Kelly McCrimman, it's hard to, it's hard to fire Gerard Gallant after winning a Jack Adams and taking him to a cup final and then fire Pete DeBoer after two conference final runs and then hire some assistant from the Leafs who's been in the league one year. It just seems like that would be a tough sell.

Yeah, man, there's also part of me going, oh, geez, an expansion team hiring an assistant off the Leafs bench. What could go wrong? That's foolproof, isn't it? Yeah. Sorry, Seattle. Dave Haxhill. Real quick on Barry Trots, I want to ask you guys this, and we know that he's going to interview in Winnipeg. And, you know, maybe he'll get an interview with Vegas. My question is, if you guys were in Barry Trotz's position, would you wait to see how the second round of the playoff shakes out? And I'm going to give you three teams that potentially, like usually you think about if a team gets the second round,

their coach is safe. But I can give you three places where I'm like, I wonder what will happen. One is Colorado, where if they don't get past, you know, and again, Sean and I talked about this earlier, feels like they're headed in the right direction. But if for some reason they implode, I think there's going to be some question marks around Jared Bednar.

Yes, Andrew Brunette was just. just nominated for the Jack Adams Award. But look, if Florida doesn't get over the hump, but he was kind of thrown into that situation after what happened with Quenville, are the Panthers potentially looking at something? And then Edmonton, you would look at, you know, I think Jay Woodcroft did a marvelous job, taken over for Dave Tippett, but he's got the interim tag.

So if you're Barry Trots, are you necessarily rushing into something with a Winnipeg or a Vegas, like somebody who has an opening now? Do you wait and say, you know what? I might want to wait and see if Colorado is looking or if Florida might be looking. Yeah, I think for sure. I don't think there's any reason to rush. I wouldn't even be, I wouldn't be surprised if Trots doesn't coach next year and just takes the year off and collects his salary of that remaining year on his deal. Wouldn't surprise me at all. Yeah, it's, it'll be interesting to see because I really wonder with Barry Trots being available, does that just grind the coaching market to a halt for a lot of these other teams?

not just in terms of teams like the Jets and probably the Knights and maybe a few others where you figure Barry Trots moves immediately to number one on their list. But even the teams where maybe you think, okay, this might not be the right fit, do all the other candidates now have to wait? Does everybody is everybody just kind of sitting around waiting for the big name to go off the board or to decide that he's not that he's not interested? because, you know, I'm curious to see, like, if I'm, because, you know, if I'm, if I'm a coaching candidate who's not Barry Trots, I might be sitting there going, well, right now, half the teams with openings aren't going to call anyone because they're, they're waiting for Barry. Right. Maybe I got to wait a little bit more.

So does the whole thing grind will hold? Or does some smart team and or coach see this as an opening to go in and maybe get an opportunity that wouldn't otherwise be there because everybody's distracted by the big name that's, that's suddenly out there. Yeah. No, it's going to be an interesting, you know, story line to watch kind of that, that musical chairs with the coaches in the next few weeks. All right. So, Jesse, we would love to have you on to chat about some trends and money lines and odds. You can go ahead and tell us if you took the under in Calgary, Edmonton, game one. That's okay. You can fess up to that. As a lifetime goalie who also likes to take

contrarian stances, I have been known to take an under or two in my life. If I, if I, I don't bet on hockey a whole lot, but if I do, it's usually the under. Thank God I haven't taken many of this postseason. Yeah. So we talk so much about in the regular season, hey, scoring is up. Talk to 10 different people, 10 different people had 10 different theories on why the scoring was up. But it feels like we've also seen that sort of carry into the post season to some extent. Yeah, it's kind of insane.

So it's funny. When I was actually doing some research for this and looking up some numbers, I stumbled. First story on top of Google was, highest scoring NHL season in 26 years, but it's likely to stop in the postseason. That was the headline. I'm not going to out who wrote that because we've all had one of those stories. But clearly that wasn't the case. It was the highest, it was the highest scoring season in 26 years with 3.14 goals per game per team.

In the playoffs, that is up to 3.4 goals, almost a third of a goal higher in the playoffs than it was in the regular season, which again was one of the highest we've seen in a very long time. The over has hit on 60% of games in the playoffs, which I think maybe some people hear 60% and say, oh, that's only 6 out of 10. That's like how strong of a trend is that? Well, this season, in a season where everyone scored, only two of the 32 teams had an over percentage of 60% or higher.

So it's so hard to get 60% on a trend of over under like that. So the fact that in playoff, games where we've heard for and we've seen for how long that when when the playoffs get here, the defense ratchets up, teams don't push for offense. They play structured sound in their own zone. You get a bunch of one nothing, two one games. Well, not this year. There have only been six games with three or less goals in them and there have been 14 with eight or more goals. It's been insane to watch and then obviously last night's game put a cherry on it. Wow. That is, I got a bit, I was one of those saying this is not going to continue.

And here we are. Hang the banner, man. We have ended the dead puck era. We fixed it. What did we do to fix it? Nobody knows. We didn't change anything. And it just happened.

I'm sure this will, this will stay like this forever. If you're someone out there wondering, like, if you're wanting the low scoring to come back, which I don't know why you'd want that. But if you're looking for hope, if you're looking for hope, or if you're looking for crushing pessimism. The second round, that game last night, that crazy Battle of Alberta is the only over so far in the second round. The over is one and three in the second round.

So the other three games all went under the total. Yeah. I mean, listen, Carolina and the Rangers are the two stingiest teams in the regular season. So I would imagine you're going to see a lot of five and a half, you know, as the over under in that series. Yeah, it's going to be interesting. That's the other thing is not only have all these games gone over, but when I'm going through the games to like total them up, so many six and a halfs.

And in the regular season, it's usually like five and a half. Every once in a while you get a six and a half. The NHL is now to the point where almost every game, the odds makers are just putting it a six and a half because everybody's scoring. It's crazy. So not only are they hitting over, the overs have been higher on average. Yeah. Listen, it's been a lot of fun to watch all the high scoring games.

Like Sean and I said earlier, don't think we're going to get another 15 goal game. Those are anomalies. but they're certainly fun. Listen, Jesse, always great to bring you by. Let's enjoy the week and we'll get you again next Thursday. Awesome. Thanks for having me, guys. Right on.

All right. Always great to connect with Jesse Granger and, yeah, man, just trying to think about who's going to end up being in certain coaching seats is a pretty fun exercise. And I'm sure in a couple of weeks from now, we might have some answers. Got some mailbag questions. Before we get to that, though, Sean, I wanted to ask you this because we got Florida, of Tampa in the playoffs. And we're recording this on Thursday in advance a game two.

So we might be having a completely different conversation on Friday and into the weekend before game three on Sunday between these two teams. Did anything change for, like, did you go into this series saying I'm picking Florida or did you go into the series saying I'm picking Tampa and like, or did anything about the way game one unfolded change? your perception or view of this series? No, it didn't. I didn't make specific round two picks, but in my original bracket, I had Florida versus

Tampa in round two, and I did pick Florida to win that series. So I guess I got a ride with that. But when we made our daily picks, I picked Tampa in game one. And that was just a case of, you know, they were coming off a real tough series with the Leafs. and whereas Florida coming off a tough series, tougher than we thought it was going to be with Washington, but probably was going to have to find another level.

I mean, look, as a Leafs fan, I came out of that series with a ton of respect for the lightning. And, you know, I'm not, I'm not betting against these guys if I can avoid it. It's going to be a big step up for Florida. Florida's a young team hasn't done a lot of winning with this group. And it doesn't mean they can't. You've got to start somewhere.

but this is, it's going to be a real good test, and there's not going to be a lot of margin for error. The capitals gave them a good series, but the capitals also let them off the mat a few times, and that's not what Tampa does. So, no, I'm not surprised at all, and I think, frankly, we're, we should all be at the point where Tampa Bay Lightning wins

no longer surprises, at least in the playoffs. So we got a battle of Florida, we got a battle of Alberta going on here to the second round. And I thought, let me look this up. So I'm going to ask you this again, a little fun, surprise trivia exercise here. In terms of interstate or interprovincial playoff series in history, Sean, what is the one that we have seen the most and what is the one that we have only seen one time? I'm curious if you know the answer. Okay.

So there's one that we've seen the most and the one and then the one that we've seen. seen the least. And I think, if I'm not mistaken, we have now, based on the teams that are in the league now, we have had every possible combination of interstate, I believe. Right. We've had all the Californians. Yeah. The New York would be tricky, right? Because you've got the, well, did the Devils count as a New York team? Okay. All right. But you still got the Rangers, Islanders and Sabers. Yeah. In there.

Penguins Flyers, we've, we've certainly seen a few times. So what's the one that we've only seen? We've seen one, one time. Yeah. Okay. I will say, is it maybe the, this, no, I was going to say Sabres and Islanders, but they, back in the 70s, I feel like they crossed paths a few times, Sabers Rangers, maybe?

Sabers Islanders have met four times. Okay. Sabers Rangers have met two times. Okay. So there's, all right. Now, this is hopefully not going to turn into a geography thing on it, because now I'm wondering what other compos have me. Obviously, Ottawa, Toronto, we saw four times. Quebec's no longer around Montreal, Quebec faced each other quite a few times. That was five times. So it's got to be a state. And Battle of Alberta, by the way, this is the sixth meeting all time. Okay. Only six, eh? Wow. That, yeah. Yeah. That feels like it feels like it would be more than that.

And okay, so help me on my geography here. What are the states where we've got Battle of Florida, various battles in New York, different combinations in California and then Pennsylvania would be the other one. Are there any others? Have I missed? Nope, I think that's it. Okay. Yeah, so that is it.

It must be one of the California ones that we've only seen once then. Yeah. Am I right there? Okay. You're right. And it's not Shark's King. it's the ducks,

I'm going to say ducks and sharks. Ducks and sharks, we've seen twice. Ducks and kings, we've only seen one time. Okay, all right. Ducks and kings we've only seen one time.

So that's the interstate matchup we've seen the fewest in history. Okay. And then the one that we've seen the most, this might surprise you. Because we haven't seen it in almost 30 years. The islanders and Rangers.

Yeah. Yeah, yeah. Eight times. They met eight times back in the day. They used to play all, even going back to the 70s. Like even, you know, obviously the Puffin-Sucks era of the 80s, but even before then. Yeah, I'm not surprised. And in fact, not to tip my hand, I might have a thing on this next week.

But their last meeting, I believe, was the 94 ratings winning when they won the Stanley Cup. So, hmm, okay. There you go. Yeah, no, I'm not surprised by that. Yeah. I didn't know there's going to be a geography test here. And Pittsburgh, Philly, by the way, they met seven times. Seven times in the plan.

Okay. So that's right. It's been a little while since the last one of them. But did they not meet just in, did they not meet just a couple of years ago? Yeah. I guess. Yeah. I guess so.

I'm thinking when I say that I'm thinking of the crazy series with all the goals, but you're right. I think there has been once since then. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. You're right. Yeah.

All right. Let's shift over to the mailbag here. And you can text us, or text us. You can leave us a voicemail. Maybe you can try. You'll probably get one of those. You just sent the text to a landline messages. You can leave some voicemail at 845-4-4-5-4-5-8449 or an email. The Athletic Hockey Show at gmail.com. Athletic Hockey Show at gmail.com. Let's take a couple in here. Maggie has written in via email and says, hey, been listening to the podcast since the very beginning. You guys, all editions of the show, you're my ride or die. With the Leaf's first round exit and the Panthers continuing to the second round, I have a question for you. Why is it that New York Islanders fans still hate John Tavares for leaving, but Philadelphia fans seem to embrace Clodgeroo? That's from Maggie. Because Islander fans are unreasonable baby. No, I'm not done with you now.

Let me tell you what. I'll tell you this. Let me tell you the story from an Islander fans perspective. And I feel like I can do it justice because I have heard it many, many times. Islander fans will tell you that in 2018, with John Tavares approaching unrestricted free agency, the team wasn't very good, but they were kind of just on the bubble of the playoffs to the point where, geez, do we go for it. Should we trade John Tavares now? Get a windfall to to help with the rebuild that we obviously need. And in the, again, this is the

Islanders fan version of the story. John Tavares says to the islanders, don't trade me. I'm not going anywhere. I want to be an islander for life. And so the Islanders don't trade them at the deadline. They're like, you know, five or six points out of a playoff spot. They immediately fall out of the playoffs. They miss the playoffs. And then John Tabaris says, ha, ha, I lied. And he goes over and jumps to the, to the Maple Leafs at the first opportunity, leaving the Islanders with nothing for their franchise player. Now, is that the way it actually played out? You can maybe guess on how I viewed. And at the end of the day, hey,

it's up to the Islanders decide if they're going to, you know, if they were going to move them or not. But Islander fans would tell you that John Tavares pulled the rug out from under them, that he said he was going to stay and that it wasn't just lip service, it wasn't just somebody giving a quote in the middle of a season that he had to say that he really made a commitment and then he backstab him versus Claude Juree

where that's a situation where Flyers fans understood he was going to be moved. They wanted him to be moved because they wanted to see him go get a cup somewhere and they wanted to get to pick some prospects they would get in return and he had his no trade.

He facilitated a deal to a team that made sense and they got a decent package back for them. And no betrayal, no backstabbing, nobody walking away with the team getting nothing at all in return. So it all works out.

So that's the view. I mean, anytime I would just suggest as an Islanders fan, anytime the Flyers fans feel like more charitable and reasonable than you are, maybe you've gone a little bit far, but that is the Islanders fan view of how the John

virus thing and that's why they still to this day booed him to this day they still have the the bad feelings because in their minds they were told he was staying and then he didn't stay. Got another email here I can read this one real quick. Jay has something that's broken up into two parts

now I was away last week Sean I was at I was in New York with the family, went to a Yankees Blue Jays game Jay says hey Ian first of all sorry that the Blue Jays couldn't beat my Yankees seen some crazy foods at Yankee Stadium this year milkshakes with canoles in them.

Another one with a cheesecake on top. Did you get anything crazy? I can tell you, Sean, so I actually went in line. This isn't too crazy, but they sold out of this. I wanted, they sell bacon on a stick at Yankee Stadium. Bacon on a stick. It's exactly. You don't need any advertising.

What was the problem with bacon that we're solving by putting it on a stick? Because you know what? As I reach a certain age, I'm trying to watch my carbs here. So I don't need the bacon in bread. Give me bacon on a stick. They know. They're coming after us, this target market of the cutting out the carbs. I was looking for a Mickelope Ultra and bacon on a stick.

But they sold out of it. They sold out of it. But I'll tell you, the craziest thing I ever ate at the ballpark, I was in Seattle a couple of years ago. And they have chili lines. toasted grasshoppers. Oh my gosh. And I...

That just got worse and worse with every new word. Chili. I was parked up and then... Grasshoppers. Toasted crickets, basically. And you had... I ate a whole little thing. I'll send you a picture.

I'll send a picture. Now is this, like I'm picturing like a giant grasshopper. I'm assuming this is like a little bag. This is like... It was a little cup. And it almost like the size of like almonds or... or something, like each one. Yeah.

I know, I know, and people say that bugs are, you know, it's great protein and all of this stuff, but that's, did they, were they, were they just out of everything else? Like, were they out of hot dogs and nachos? And that's what you want with? I try, I try to go for different foods when I'm at these different ballparks, you know? Okay. Try to lean into some things. So I'm thinking, what's, what's the review?

What's like, you got to break down for us now. Like they almost tasted like, like, yeah, like almost like nuts or like chips or something. You know, just very crispy. Yeah. And the chili lime dusting was, was perfect. But when I send you the picture, you're going to be like there's no way on earth that you would eat that. No. Yeah.

Okay. I got to see this. Okay. The second part of Jay's kind of question here, and this will actually lead us right into this week in hockey history too. Jay says, hey, this week in 1919. 88, the Oilers and the Bruins started playing for the Stanley Cup on May the 18th. I know that was the weird year where it was technically a five-game sweep for the Oilers because of that weird stuff that happened to power outage.

The Oilers only lost two games in the playoffs that year in four rounds. Do you think that that's an unbreakable record? Yeah, that's, that was a hell of a run. And that is the kind of, you know, flip side to today, you talk about all, you know, all the parody and everything. And back then, sometimes you were just like, yeah, the oilers are winning. We all know it. And, you know, we all get that.

Unbreakable record, I, you know, I don't know. Remember that the L.A. Kings of all teams, 2012, even though they were an eight seat, came real close to tying that because they went 4-1, 40, 4-1, and then were leading, I believe, 3-0 in the final before the Devils then won, 1-2. games and made everybody fly back and forth across the country a few times. And then the Kings closed it off. So I wouldn't say unbreakable, but obviously very, very difficult to break. And the record for most games played in a series sweep of five is definitely one that I think

will stand for a very long time. The Montreal Canadians, I think in the first year that they won the Cup in the 70s dynasty, Sean, they only lost one game. that year. But the caveat being they only played three rounds of best of seven versus, you know, Edmonton had, Edmonton obviously had four rounds to play. And so Edmonton went 16 and two. Montreal went 12 and 1. I don't know which is more impressive or both the same, but I still say to this day, the one playoff record that will never be broken is New York Islanders winning 19 series in a row. That is the, not just the,

the hockey record. That's the pro sports record. 19 in a row, you know, four Stanley Cups and then three more series to get to the final in year five. We will never, ever, ever see that again. Well, think about this, just to put that into context, as we marvel at the

current run of the Tampa Bay Lightning, they're not even halfway there. Like Tampa's won nine straight playoff series. And we were like, oh my God, this is unbelievable. Well, you're not even halfway to the 19. So, It's, yeah, and you know, 19 in a row. I mean, the, and I know people are out there listening to this going like, wait, didn't

the Celtics win seven titles in a row? They did. They had to win two rounds back then to do it. So even they didn't, didn't get up to the 19 series in row. And I think they only faced elimination in like one or maybe two of those series before, before they ran into the oil. There's just absolute dominance. And again, depending on who, on what side of the, you know, fandom you're on, that was either

amazing. and man, we'll never get that again, those great dynasties, those legendary teams, or you're sitting there going, man, that must have been boring as hell for four straight years to know who was going to win the Stanley Cup year after year because nobody could beat this this Islanders powerhouse. But don't worry about it if you feel that way because we're never, ever, ever getting anywhere close to that. Yeah.

What, the only real brush that they had was against, as we talked about this earlier, great Islanders Rangers playoff series, was that one where, was it Ken Morrow who scored an overtime? and it was like a game five winner go home situation. And it's like, yeah, yeah. They took them right to the right to the break. It couldn't have been Glenn Hanlon, but it was like some random Ranger goalie in there. And it was just like a terrible 80s style overtime goal.

Like just. Yep. No, it's, we will never see that again. No. So Jay led us off to a little this week in hockey history talking about how Oilers and Bruins met in the Stanley Cup this week back in 1988. I want to just hit on one thing with you here.

That's from May the 16th, 1996. Steve Eisenman scores in double overtime, a very iconic goal, slap shot that goes over the shoulder of John Casey to give Detroit a game seven double overtime win over St. Louis to put them into the conference final. Here's my question for, and I know you've got a lot of thoughts on that game seven because it was iconic and it kind of led to some interesting things. If the NHL ever just, now that they've got this partnership with ESPN, I always think about, I'd love to see some more 30 for 30s,

like NHL focused 30 for 30s. I think I'm putting the 1995-96 St. Louis Blues near the top of my list of teams that I want to see a full-out documentary. Like what were the 1995-96 St. Louis Blues? Like what was going on there? And I think they might be the most interesting team that didn't win a Stanley Cup. Way back when I was at the Grant Land. So we're going back away as I started a series that I called 10 Facts about a fun team where I would just write about one specific team that didn't win a championship or anything like that.

And the very first one I did was the 95-96 Blues because they are, I'm absolutely with you one of the most fascinating teams of all time. The Mike Keenan situation, the Gretzky trade. So many ex-oilers. Such an old team. Go look at that roster. even for the mid-90s. Was McTavish on that? Was Craig McTavish on that team?

Craig McTavish was on there at some point. There were, Dale Howardchuck was on that team at one point, not by the playoffs. I think he had moved on by then, but, you know, Dale Howard-Chuck was on there. All the ex-oilers, young Chris Prager, it was just an absolute fascinating team. And then, you know, with all of that, not a very good team. They were basically 500 in the regular season. Back then, that still gets you in the playoffs. They go, that was also the year that Mike Keenan decided he was just going to start

Grant Fier every game. That was it. He just wasn't going to use a backup goalie. I mean, these days, goalies won't start back to back games. Kenan decided we were going to do back to back to back to back, et cetera, all the way down to 82 games and made it right to the end of the season. before Fear eventually had to miss a game. And then they go into the playoffs against the Leafs,

and Nick Kirprios accidentally falls directly on Grand Feure's knee and injures him, and then John Casey has to come in. They win that series, and they go out and they play the Red Wings. And I got to say, I'm mad even talking about this, because a couple of weeks ago I wrote a piece where I ranked every single team's most painful game seven loss, all 32 teams. And you're always nervous when you do something like that because you're like, which one am I going to miss?

What am I going to overlook? And it was the blues that I missed. I had a different pick for the blues. Of course, it should have been this one. I apologize to blues fans. But the other lasting legacy of this team, Wayne Gretzky,

bobbling the puck in overtime and Eisenman comes in and scores. The Red Wings go on in the conference final to play the Colorado Avalanche. And that's where the rivalry starts. That's where the Claude Lemieux hit from behind on Chris Draper. if the blues win and they go on and play the avalanche, we lose the greatest rivalry in at least the, you know, I would argue the modern history of the NHL, Avs Red Wings. So that was kind of their parting gift to us that they bowed out just in time on what I have argued is the, you know, the greatest shot I've ever seen and the greatest game seven

overtime goal that we'll ever see by Steve Eisenman. And also the greatest camera work we've ever seen on a goal because, man, I could watch that replay a dozen times. And we all could unless we're blues fans. Yeah. No, it's, yeah, I'm with you. Like that, that to me is one of the, one of the teams that I just would love to see, like a full out investigative. Well, 30 for 30. Yeah.

I just want to know. Mike, Tina, they have, and you want to talk. odd records that that will never be broken. One from that team is a guy by the name of Bruce Racine was the backup goalie played 11 games without starting. And that was the only season of his career. So, I mean, the record for both a season and a career, most games played by a goalie without ever starting.

He played 11 times because he kept coming in whenever Fure had a bad game and had to get pulled, but they never ever started him. and then John Casey comes over late in season. Listen, before we wrap up, I have just sent to both you and our producer Danielle via our Slack app, a picture of the toasted chili lime. Oh, no way. Grasshoppers. Did you see these?

You did not eat that. I did. So I just want you to describe these to our listeners. Describe them. When I was, what I'm looking at is a picture. This is like when I was in my last year of college, I lived. with four guys and we didn't clean very well and like every now and then like one of the girlfriends would come over and be like you've got to clean a little bit and they would sweep under the

couch and this looks like what came out when we swept under the couch it's just a little bowl of cockroaches and miscellaneous other stuff and it's it's I mean it's smaller than I thought I'll at least be happy about that but there are is no way. I'm not, there's, that is not something that, that you eat. That's something you put in your pocket and when you go to a fancy restaurant, you sprinkle it on your steak when you're halfway done and get a refund. That's, uh, that's awful. There's no way. I'm out. Okay. It's a hard note for me. I'll tell you what. Later, later today, I will tweet out this photo so our listeners can also get a sense of what I have just sent you. All right. So I'm going to, I'm going to leave it

there. I'll leave it on a disgust, a note where you're disgusted with me. That, It seems about right. I really thought that nothing was going to bother me more than the Game 7 Leafs, but this week. But I've done it. You've surpassed it. Yeah, there we go. All right.

We'll leave it there. Thanks, everybody, for joining us for this Thursday edition of the Athletic Hockey Show. We'll get you again next week. Jesse Granger, of course, we'll drop by. In the interim, you can always email us your questions to the athletic hockey show at gmail.com. I would love to see some pictures. I'll take any of your weird pictures, too. If you've eaten some weird food, I'm all in.

Email them to The Athletic Hockey Show at gmail. You can also leave us a voicemail at 8454-4-5, 845. 8459. All right, if you're not a subscriber with the Athletic, you can join us at theathletic.com slash hockey show. Get an annual subscription for $1 a month for the first six months. And you can also subscribe to the Athletic Audio Plus, an Apple podcast, get the bonus content from our entire network.

You're going to start with a 30-day free trial. And then it's just 99 cents a month after that.