transcript

Speaker 1:
[00:00] The other thing I'll say that happened in this game I thought was really notable was McKinnon got nailed for diving, embellishment, right?

Speaker 2:
[00:08] Yes.

Speaker 1:
[00:09] And we talk about Crosby in the Pittsburgh segment, what happened with him. And you know what that says to me when Crosby and McKinnon get called for embellishment on back-to-back nights? What? What's going on at Coal Harbor? That's number one.

Speaker 2:
[00:32] Welcome to 32 Thoughts The Podcast presented by your Canadian Toyota dealers and the 100% electric BZ available now during Red Tag Day, Sramaty, Friedman, Bukauskas alongside once again, so Elliotte, the Ottawa Senators seeming like they were doing everything right to rid themselves of any bad juju after a tough ending to game two in Carolina. They sent one of their fans, Kyle Ivan, who's considered among the fan base, bad luck all the way to Taiwan, the furthest away possible from the Canadian Tire Center. Tom Green was in the house. Great interview with Sean Mckenzie, Ottawa product, Ottawa fan. It was not enough. They are in the hole big time down 0-3, and the big concern around Jake Sanderson, leaving the game with injury. He took the hit from Taylor Hall that was given two minutes for a legal check to the head. You guys had wondered on the panel as well, was it blocking the shot off the hand? Did that contribute to his absence as well? But as Travis Green said in the postgame, it was the hit to the head as the major driver behind all of that. So Ottawa in major trouble and down their most important defenseman.

Speaker 1:
[01:51] Carolina, all the credit for the way they've played. They've throttled the Sanders, bottlenecked them, prevented them from doing absolutely anything. I do want to say about that injury to Sanderson. Yes, we did wonder on the air if it was more the hand than the head, simply because of the timing and the way they unfolded. But as Travis Green and you mentioned, it was the head. And Ottawa was pretty angry, I heard. They talked a little bit about it publicly, but I heard behind the scenes too. They were pretty angry about how the Brady Kachak play with Martinuk got called a major and reviewed and there was nothing similar that happened with Taylor Hall and Sanderson. They were pretty mad about that. And I think they made their complaints heard both publicly and privately. Sanderson is a huge loss. You know, Ottawa has been battling defensive injuries, all playoffs. Cleven came back. Chabot has come back earlier. I don't know about you, Kyle, but Chabot simply does not look right to me. And I think he's been on the ice for six goals against that Carolina scored in this series. And there were a couple of times we were watching him in game number three. And you can tell that he's not comfortable doing certain things. That he's just not there. So I'm wondering if he's got some sort of protection on there or the injury is still... Because remember, he came back way earlier than expected. He talked about how he beat the odds to come back. And I will never criticize a player for that. He is trying to do the best for his teammates and his organization. And that is to be applauded and mentioned and not mocked or ridiculed in any way, shape or form. But I just wonder if he's not... I wonder if whatever he's dealing with in terms of injury or brace or whatever he's doing is preventing him from doing things because he just doesn't look right. He just doesn't look like himself. But now if you lose Sanderson, you're really stuck. He's your best defenseman. He's one of your best players. And it's not like they're able to do a lot anyway. The Hurricanes deserve a lot of credit. There's a reason they generally win two rounds of the playoffs. They're disciplined. They play a certain way. They buy in. They understand the way it's going to go. And they have owned Ottawa this series. Kyle, the last pod, you mentioned how successful they were on the penalty kill and how they completely figured out Ottawa's power play. That hasn't changed and it didn't change on Thursday night with a really ugly five on three. But the other thing is, Kyle, when Ottawa had the extra man at the end of the game, trying to score the tying goal, they were completely outmanned and outgunned. They dumped the puck in. It was like one on three or one on four.

Speaker 2:
[04:45] It's crazy.

Speaker 1:
[04:46] Carolina did whatever they wanted to defensively. Somebody texted me and they said, I referred to the 2014 semifinal game of the Olympics between Canada and the US. Where Canada won one nothing. And I said that they could have played for three days and the US wasn't going to score. Somebody who listens to the pod compared it to that game. They said that was one of the best defensive games they ever saw someone play. And they said that Carolina knew what Ottawa was going to do and they couldn't be broken down. They just stopped them however they wanted to.

Speaker 2:
[05:21] And even beyond that, I mean, yes, full credit to Carolina and how they've gone about things. The penalty kill, perfect. Ottawa is 0 for 12 in the series combined. Caxaxi in postgame, it was the power play that cost us the game. But beyond how aggressive Carolina's playing and forcing Ottawa into situations that make them uncomfortable, there just felt like there was a disconnect in large stretches. And maybe that's the frustration starting to really seep in. Sanderson's now not around, he's not an option. You're looking at being down a goal, you're seeing the clock tick away minutes towards being 0-3 in the series. That can all, I'm sure, factor into where the headspace was at. But for a team that got themselves back into the playoffs, down the stretch, largely because they were one of the more connected teams going in the league in terms of being able to execute a game time, it's just looked far opposite for too much of this series so far. But again, I think a big reason behind that is how Carolina plays. They have been so, so aggressive in every area of the ice, and Ottawa just hasn't had an answer.

Speaker 1:
[06:44] You know, it was interesting, Green in the postgame was asked about Kachak and Stutzla and he called them average.

Speaker 2:
[06:49] Yes. Now, he also said, he goes, this is one of those series where great players can look average because of how tight checking it is. But yes, I know what he was saying.

Speaker 1:
[07:02] But, you know, we did the Stutzla piece before the game and Green talks like that to some of those guys. Stutzla talked about how they have a lot of conversations like that. He also talked about how when he first got there, he had a pretty serious conversation with Shabbat about Shabbat's game. And generally, I think he's being incredibly effective for them this year. I thought he played great. Like I said, now I think he's really battling and I think he's really hurt and far from 100 percent. And the lack of effectiveness there is obvious for that reason. But we've talked a little bit about how you always want to be careful when you do those kinds of things because everybody has to think they're rowing in the same direction. And everybody has to think everybody's got each other's back. But this is a time it works. And you weren't there, Kyle, but watching it, you could see that Ottawa crowd was incredibly disappointed, incredibly disappointed. And last year, they were down 3-0. They won two and got to game six. I think they really hoped and believed that this was going to be different. But Carolina this year is better than Toronto was last year. And Carolina is playoff tested, battle-tested. And boy, like that Stankoven line, it looks fantastic. But those guys, they know what they have to do. And they are just shutting them down.

Speaker 2:
[08:41] Third goal of the series for Stankoven. And as we know, so Craig Simpson, who we work with, his son, Dylan, is part of the coaching staff at the University of North Dakota. And so when Jackson Blake was playing there, and Craig would oftentimes, you know, we'd fly wherever, Toronto, elsewhere on a Friday for a Saturday game. And he'd have on his iPad the North Dakota game on the Friday night. And when Blake was there, he would often just say, man, like just Jason Blake's kid there, he's just unbelievable. The motor never stopped running in the middle of everything. He was looking at him going, like, where does this guy get drafted? Oh, Carolina. He goes, I think they may have a pretty good player here. And sure enough, like he's been such a spark plug. I mean, really, at large, since he came into the league, but has had his fingerprints on this series and a big goal in game number three. So whether it's that line, Jordan Martinook, up and down the lineup for Carolina, all full value to this point. And now a chance to finish off the Ottawa Senators Saturday afternoon at the Canadian Tire Center.

Speaker 1:
[09:47] Kyle, the Senators can't think about winning four. They just have to think about winning one. And it's unbelievable when you think about it too, Kyle. All year long, if the Senators get goaltending, look out. Now they've got goaltending.

Speaker 2:
[10:03] Yeah. It was the one question for them seemingly coming in. And now through three games, it's the only area you're not asking the question. Yep.

Speaker 1:
[10:13] Goaltending. Why would you worry about that? Guy's been great.

Speaker 2:
[10:17] No. Allmark has done his part. No question. Okay. The Buffalo Sabres and the Boston Bruins from TD Garden on Thursday night. We had another penalty shot in the playoffs.

Speaker 1:
[10:29] Keep them coming.

Speaker 2:
[10:30] Yes. Alex Lyon, who got the start, turned aside Victor Arvidsson. Twenty-four saves in all for Lyon. The Sabres take a two-to-one series lead and a three-to-one victory. As Lyon said in the postgame, beforehand, he just got a feeling in the room that that group was just going to send it for 60 minutes and see what happens. And it worked as they have a series lead again.

Speaker 1:
[10:57] Buffalo's best game of the series. No question. Again, this is an example of a coach having a good pulse on the room. So, Lukaunin gives up the bad goal. And we're sitting here and we're saying, okay, do you make the goalie switch? This is where you have to know what's really happening. What are you seeing in Lukaunin? What makes sense? What doesn't? What is your goalie coach seeing? Lion's been hurt. Are you sure he's ready? Again, we've talked about it. Lion is the savior. He comes in. The bad news for Boston is, Lion comes in and has this. You're now worried you're in one of those stretches where he can't lose. He has like a 10 to 15 game stretch where you cannot lose. And he cannot lose. Again, his kryptonite is Tanner Janow. Don't fight him. Don't let him shoot. He scored the only goal of the game. But otherwise, Lion was fantastic. I mean, Arvidsson got the penalty shot, again called the penalty shots, and Lion had him totally psyched out. He took a bad shot. And, you know, that's the thing. That shows to me that Lindy Ruff has a good handle on his group. Changes the goalie, loses Josh Norris, and they win. But I think the thing I'm worried about most for Boston, and, you know, aside from the fact he missed the penalty shot, I think Arvidsson's been very good. Boston's been the better team in this series, and they're down two games to one. Now, I thought it was really interesting that post-game, Marko Sturm spent some time talking about Swainman getting poked and prodded. So, he's looking for those calls. Let's see in game four, does Boston get a power play or two because that happens. You know, Ottawa, the way they came out in the post-game, they're gonna, Ottawa's gonna get a call or two in the next game if Sanderson doesn't play. That's definitely going to happen. What Sturm is doing is he's saying, okay, we're down two to one, it's time to play this card. We, clearly on the off days, they spoke to the series supervisor and said, watch how Swainman's getting handled here. They didn't get a satisfactory result. Now they're gonna go publicly. So, they're hoping that they get a call or two on Swainman in game number four. But overall, that's a tough one for the Bruins, who I'd say for the most part have been the better teams, better team in that series.

Speaker 2:
[14:06] Now, and Boston had their chances. I had two power plays there in the later stages of the third period. It says even it up and credit for the Sabres in fighting those off. Sturm in the post game thought his group was a little tight and maybe part of that is coming back at home and trying to feel the energy and use it the right way. That was probably Alex Tuck's best game of the series to this point for Buffalo and exclamation point with the goal there, the go-ahead goal in the third period. But it's been a series that has featured some wild swings at times. This one fell a little more on Thursday night, kind of on the rails. And maybe that played into Buffalo's game plan too. But they put themselves in a good spot here, going on the road and stealing one again. I think they needed a result like that, not only on the scoreboard, but just how they felt about their own game. An important one here for the Sabres.

Speaker 1:
[15:13] I look at Boston and I think they've got more of a chance to win this series than I thought they did coming in. Before this year's, I was like Buffalo and six. But I think Boston has played well enough. Like the tight thing, I mean, look, Sturm's the coach, he knows the team, he knows them better than I do. I just don't know, the way you played in the first two games, I don't think you have any reason to be tight. Boston playing at home, they got a lot of veterans on that team. I don't think they have any reason to be tight. You know, Buffalo had a starting goalie in this series, they chased him. It's not like Lion is chopped liver. Anyone who listens to this podcast knows the respect we have for him. But you chased Buffalo's number one goalie. There's no reason to be tight. There were a lot of things going your way. And I would just say that's a disappointing defeat for the Bruins.

Speaker 2:
[16:28] So 2-1 Buffalo there. Anything else on that one before we move on?

Speaker 1:
[16:33] I don't think so. I mean, it's tough for me. I'd like to watch Boston more. But it's off and on at the same times as either Ottawa or Montreal. And those are the games that we do mostly. So it's tough to pay attention to that. There was one Bruins fan who sent a notice. He says, you got to talk more about the Bruins series. But I admit, it's tougher when we're on the air at the same time breaking down another game.

Speaker 2:
[17:02] Yes, I understand. Okay. Colorado and the Kings says, another series that has now moved to 3-0, the Avalanche 4-2 over Los Angeles in LA on Thursday night. And we talked about and give, as you say, LA credit for how hard they certainly defended the first two games and in large part, kept the top guns for the Avalanche without the space that they like to have to move around and really be the dangerous players that they are known to be. However, on Thursday night, all Kale McCarr needed was a little bit of freedom at the top of the blue line. I still have no idea how he saw that lane to the net and managed to get the shot off that he did. But he's been making a career out of doing that play. And it paid off big time, a huge goal for Colorado then and a lead that they did not look back on.

Speaker 1:
[18:04] It's kind of interesting. If you look at the overall point totals, it's not as if Colorado's big guys are getting a ton of points, right? It's not like McKinnon's dialing up the numbers or McCarr's dialing up the numbers or Natchez is dialing up the numbers or anybody is. But if you give them the slightest opportunity, they take it, as you said there. You know, the tough one for LA. And I think LA has played pretty hard this series. They're just, in every game, they're just not as good, right? They're just on paper and overall, they're just not as strong as Colorado. So every game, there's that little bit of difference, Kyle, and the Avalanche exploits it. It's why they've won 2-1, 2-1, and 4-2 with an empty netter. They're just a little bit better. They're just a little bit more explosive. And when I saw that, I think that was the first goal on Forsberg go in, Kyle, I was like, oh, that's really bad for LA. Now, Forsberg's played pretty well and he's won the starting job, but LA can't give up goals like that in this series. Like, he has to be basically perfect. If you're going to be beaten, you have to be beaten on a great play and say, oh, not much I could have done about that. Because if you give up a rough one like that one was, it's just too hard for LA to make one or two of those up. So when I saw that one go in, I was like, oh, this is not going to be the King's Knight. That Manson injury, that's a big one. They've added some edge to their team. Obviously, having Cadry there, he can be a really nasty guy, teams love that. But Manson on the blue line is really one of their meanest defensemen and arguably their meanest player. And it was kind of a weird play. You know, he got initial contact and then he got held in there by Edmondson. But if he's out for any period of time, that's a real bit of nastiness gone for their blue line. They don't have a lot like him. So that would be the one concern I would have for them out of this game. Is the Manson injury. But the moment I saw that first strange goal go in, I was kind of like, boy, it's going to be tough for LA to win that game. Their goalies have to be basically perfect. I'll also say this, Kyle. I do not like the fact that we could be looking at three sweeps. I just think that's bad. Sweeps are bad. And some of these other series look like they're going to go really far and I hope they do. But three sweeps is potentially very bad.

Speaker 2:
[21:02] You don't like that? The commissioner certainly doesn't like that either. The first round is supposed to be compelling. They're supposed to add to the intrigue. Like long series right out of the gate. And yeah. I mean, I guess if there was one that you could kind of look at, all right, it was going to be a sweep in the first round. You go, yeah, Colorado, LA, I could see it. The other two are certainly a little more surprising. But Colorado was wire-to-wire the top team in the regular season. And they haven't blown the doors off any game here yet. But as you say, they've just been a little bit better. Could you not feel, like I could feel my ribs collapse, seeing Josh Manson be hit into the boards there by the bench on Edmondson, by Edmondson, couldn't you? I just, I went looking at it. Yeah. It does not look very fun.

Speaker 1:
[22:03] No, it did not. Now, the other thing I'll say that happened in this game I thought was really notable was McKinnon got nailed for diving, embellishment, right?

Speaker 2:
[22:14] Yes.

Speaker 1:
[22:15] And we talk about Crosby in the Pittsburgh segment, what happened with him. And you know what that says to me when Crosby and McKinnon get called for embellishment on back-to-back nights?

Speaker 2:
[22:30] What?

Speaker 1:
[22:33] What's going on at Cole Harbor? That's number one. And number two, embellishment is a real thing in these playoffs. It's clear to me after seeing that, the officials are getting notes about it. And they're, they're all over it. They're worried about it and they should be. It's bad. Every year, we get a reminder of how ferocious the playoffs are. But we also seem to get a reminder of how bad embellishment can be. I really don't like it. And it says to me that the officials are getting notes about it. And we also talk in the Minnesota series about how we affected, how we think it affected some of those calls. And I'll leave it to there. But McKinnon getting nailed for that. Like I thought in the Ottawa game, I didn't like the penalty, the interference call on Batherson. If you were watching Ottawa, Carolina, it was a faceoff play. Batherson swings around. I can't remember who he tripped. I think it was Martinuk, actually. Martinuk was trying to go out to the point, and he trips over Batherson, and they call interference. And I didn't like that call, because if you go back to Montreal, Tampa, and the overtime-winning Golden Game 2, Doc is trying to get out to the point to Moser, and Kucherov puts his stick on him. And it could be, it could be interference. And I remember asking Kevin and Jennifer, who I was working with, do you think that's a penalty? And they were both like, no, that's a face-off. That's what happens. I'm like, okay. But to me, if Kucherov, his play is okay, then what happened with Batherson and Martinuk is okay. But Martinuk goes down, and so they call a penalty. And that, this whole thing says to me is that the referees, when it comes to players falling, they're battling. They're really battling about are these dives or are these legitimate trips. And the McKinnon penalty, that was perfect evidence to me, is that these guys are really in tune to it, and they want to nail somebody for it. They want these players to stop because they think it's a problem.

Speaker 2:
[25:00] So now we're in a situation where potentially the next game could be the final one for real. For Anzai Kopitar's career, we remember Team Canada had the Olympics quarterfinal game when Crosby left with injury. The messaging there was we are making sure this is not Crosby's last game of the Olympics. Of course, wasn't able to play the rest of the tournament. But that was the thought internally at the time. If there's one thing for the Kings to cling on to some hope, to try to extend this any further and just see where they can take it from Sunday, it is that. Don't let this be called the 10th last game.

Speaker 1:
[25:41] Did you see them smash the stick on the empty netter?

Speaker 2:
[25:43] Yes.

Speaker 1:
[25:45] Don't see that too often.

Speaker 2:
[25:48] Well, down 3-0 to a team like Colorado, that's not a good feeling. So I understand the frustration. But you've got to find something, something to give you a little bit of hope. All right. So as you mentioned, Elliotte, we'll get to the other series, the games that went on on Wednesday night a little later on in the podcast. Why don't we just run through some news and notes before we get to the final thoughts here. So we know New Jersey has their guide, you have anything fresh on Toronto, in Nashville, in Vancouver, and the opening is there.

Speaker 1:
[26:28] Yeah. Okay. So I watched Real Kipper and Borne on Thursday before I went into work, and Nick had some really interesting stuff, and I know a lot of it went viral. And I don't really have a lot to disagree with about him, what he said, and hopefully I can fill in some blanks here. So I have more clarity since our last pod. I said the finalists were Ryan Martin from the Rangers, Scott White from the Dallas Stars, and either John Chica or Evan Gold from the Bruins. I wasn't sure about the third one. And I now believe it was Chica. It was Chica, Martin, and White. And in addition, Kyle, what I heard is that they were all invited back to Toronto on Tuesday for in-person interviews, and they were all told there was the possibility that a favorite may be invited to stay and meet with the head of Rogers, Edward Rogers, on Wednesday, and could advance to a potential final stage where if you could impress the owner of Rogers, something you and I, Kyle, could never do, then you could become the next general manager of the Toronto Maple Leafs. From what I understand, that second phase did not happen for any one of the candidates. They all met. I'm told that Ryan Martin from the Rangers was informed sometime after that meeting that even though he had a couple of great interviews and they were impressed, he wasn't advancing further and that he wouldn't be the next GM. Martin is interviewed in Nashville. We'll see how he does in maybe some of these other searches. He did nothing to hurt himself here. They just ultimately moved on, which leaves White and Chayka. The thing that's most interesting about that, Kyle, is that they are very different candidates, almost polar opposites. Age, background, expertise, experience, everything about them is almost completely different. I don't know if you could find two more different people if you tried. Now, Nick had talked about that he thought it was going to be Chayka. I do believe the organization is leaning that way at this time, but, and it is possible, I think Chayka gets it, but I think we're far from done. I don't think anything's going to be done this week. I don't think anything's going to be done this weekend. But, what I do think is that, I don't even know how I would term it. Like, obviously, they didn't go to that final Meeting Edward Rogers stage, so maybe you want to call it a slight pause. But what I do think, Kyle, is that they're going back, doing more due diligence. Is there anything we're not seeing here with either of these candidates? Is there anything we're missing? And before we advance to potentially that final stage, I think they're doing more due diligence. And that's where I think they are right now. Are we missing anything? Is there anything else we have to check? Now, the other thing...

Speaker 2:
[29:56] And missing anything as in, like, is there still somebody else maybe we haven't considered? Or are they really honed in on these two?

Speaker 1:
[30:03] You know what, Kyle, it's a great question. And I'll give you an example. One of the people I've been wondering why their name I have not heard is Jason Spezza. Like, I think Jason Spezza would be a great candidate. I think someday he will turn out to be a very good GM. He loves hockey, and right now he's putting in the work. And I've been asking, why is Jason Spezza not part of this search? And what I found out is that I believe a couple of teams in this process, not just the Maple Leafs, have gauged his interests, and he has indicated this is not his time. He has politely declined. Apparently, he has told other teams that he still has more to learn, and when he does look at becoming a manager, he wants to make sure he feels he's ready. And that time is not now. So, and Doug Armstrong, I don't even know if there's been contact between the Maple Leafs and the Blues. And when you look at the candidates that they've kind of been talking to, I'm not even convinced that Doug Armstrong is a guy that they would want, even though I think his personality, I would say, would be perfect for Toronto. If they want a guy who's going to come in and not be afraid of anything, he's that guy. But I just, when you look at what they're searching for, he doesn't fit what they seem to be searching for. So I think it's more research on the two guys they have and the two people they're at right now, which is White and Chaka. And I think they're going deeper into that. It definitely points in this direction. But, like I said, it's not over. I want to say this, too. I am still very curious to see what this Matt Sundeen thing is going to end up looking like. And I know it's getting downplayed a bit in terms of what his role will be. I am not sure. I want to see, when this is all over, if Matt Sundeen is part of this, and I do think they want him to be part of this, I am very curious to see what it's all going to look like. I just, I just wonder if there's an undersell going on here, Kyle.

Speaker 2:
[32:49] What are you getting at here? Maybe there could be a bigger role than...

Speaker 1:
[32:54] That's what I wonder...

Speaker 2:
[32:54] .than we're thinking?

Speaker 1:
[32:56] And you have to understand, like, I say this is a person who really likes Sundeen. I confess I have a bias towards him. I really like the guy. And I'm just, like, they had him here, they were talking to him. I just wonder if there's any chance that it's not just an advisor, if it's something bigger than that. So I want to wait to see what it all looks... I mean, I could be wrong. I freely admit I could be wrong. But the underselling of his role, it's got my antenna up. Maybe it doesn't work out. Maybe they both decide to go in a different direction. But I'm just wondering about it. That's all.

Speaker 2:
[33:55] All right.

Speaker 1:
[33:55] Well, it could be totally wrong.

Speaker 2:
[33:57] I know. But typically when you wonder, there is a purpose behind it.

Speaker 1:
[34:00] So we'll see.

Speaker 2:
[34:01] You're not one to wake up and wonder.

Speaker 1:
[34:03] Yes, that is true. But we'll see. I've been wrong about things before. I'll say this. A couple things are very interesting. I've heard about some of the interviews. They definitely ask a lot of questions about process, sports science, analytics, and not just use of analytics, but building analytics. Those are definitely things that they are asking about. And I will say this to you too, Kyle. There is no question that Matthew's future, which is in Matthew's hands more than it is in the Maple Leafs hands, is very large over these conversations. Both in terms of, I think, the Maple Leafs' understanding at this point in time. They don't know how Matthews feels and how, which way he eventually moves could change the direction of the franchise. And I think some of these candidates, and it was funny somebody said to me, they're not sure if the candidates are asking because they want to know in case they get the job, or they want to know in case they don't get the job, and their current team might want to get a jump on, hey, Austin Matthews might be available. But I think the Maple Leafs are saying, they just don't know when they have to be prepared for anything. You know, the Mike Gillis thing, I just, I just want to say this. I said at last pod that I had heard that there was at least one school of thought he would be invited back for another in-person interview. That hasn't happened yet. But I want to correct some things I think are wrong. There are people out there who have texted me and said, do you think that Gillis is already hired and this GM is going to work with him? No, I don't believe that. I do not believe that at all. I don't think that's happened. I can understand why people might think that, but that has not happened. And one person who I told that to, they said to me, they've had like five meetings with him already. Why haven't they hired him? I'm like, five? Where did you get that from? They had one, I think, dinner meeting with them, and that was months ago, and one Zoom interview with them. I think they've only spoken to them twice. So I think some of this stuff about Gillis is way out there and not correct. Now I'll admit this. I have no evidence that they've told him he's out, and there certainly seemed to be some momentum behind him at one point, but it seems to have gone cold right now, and the idea that he's been hired and they're just waiting to add to him, it's false. It's just not true. And I'll say something else. Apparently, when the Maple Leafs invited people to interview with them, the position that they've told people they're interviewing them for is the head of hockey operations, which is interesting because it's similar language to the devils just used when they hired Sonny Mehta. They called him the head of their hockey operations. That's what they're interviewing for. And as far as I know, it's still one person. Could they do two? Yes. But the longer they go in this process, it's one, the head of hockey operations. We'll see. Fascinating times. I know Nick set the internet on fire. And I don't really disagree with a lot he has to say. But that's kind of how I see it right now. Nashville, I think, is looking at four finalists. Fitzgerald is one. We'll see the others. And I think there's going to be more in person. So I do a radio hit in Nashville every week with Adam Vingen, Willie Donick, and Derek Mason. Adam Vingen asked me if about the length of the search is taking a long time. I don't care. Nashville is one job. Get this right. I don't care how long it takes. I really don't. Vancouver, who were the names that have been reported so far? Don, Ray Whitney, I think that's true. I believe they've done a formal interview with Ryan Johnson, Kevin Adams. Dom, are there any names I've missed that have been reported already? No. Okay. Thanks, Dom. I think it's going to be a long list and I will spend most, I think they have spent most of this week and a good chunk of next week. I think it's going to be like the Nashville process. Introductory conversations with a lot of people and then cut it down. And I don't think we're at a point yet where they're cutting it down. I think they're going to talk to a lot of people. And what I'm curious about here in the end is how the structure is all going to work. But we'll get to that another time. I made a mistake already, Dom. I made that comment about three different lists on Oilers Now with Stauffer. I should have known better. I did not intend for that to turn into a tire fire. But of course it did. One thing I wanted to mention about Seattle, Patrick Alveen, the former Canucks GM. I'm wondering if he ends up there. I know a lot of people have suggested Minnesota, because he's got a history with Bill Guerin. He also has a history with Jason Baudrill. So I think Seattle could be possible for Alveen too. And I don't know if anybody watched Detroit, but man, Yzerman looked mad. He looked, you could tell he was mad. And there's a lot that's still going to play out there. He left open, like he said, I'm going to see it through. I'm not going anywhere, and I wouldn't expect any different. That guy is no quitter. You're going to have to drag him out by his arms for him not to try to fix it and make it work. But he left the possibility open that the structure changes. And he definitely talked about player changes. You know, one of the things I suspected was, you know, a year ago, he took criticism even internally for not going out and helping them. This year, he helped them, and it still didn't get them. And you could tell he was mad at the players. And, you know, I think when you take a look at how hard Todd McClellan was on the Red Wings players after that last game, the 8-1 loss to Florida, and I think everybody understood why he felt that way. Yzerman, McClellan up there together, and Yzerman giving him a 100% vote of confidence, that was a message. That was a message. And the message was, the team I've put together, it's not good enough. And we already knew that from the fact they didn't get in, but you know how sometimes managers will defend it, say we weren't ready, we had some bad luck, maybe some injuries. No, he wasn't sugarcoating anything. It's, we've talked about how Yzerman is all, he is admitted, he won't pay prices, and especially for rentals, big summer for him. He's put everyone on notice. It's tough to predict. If they don't, like, I think it's one of those things, if they don't make a big trade this summer of some kind, or a big move this summer of some kind, people are gonna be shocked. And he's walked himself into a position where he almost has to do it.

Speaker 2:
[42:24] It is something when he talked about him and Chris Draper talking about the team, even before things went off, the skids in March and going, I'm not sure we're really as good as our record is saying right now. And made the moves of the deadline to try to improve them. But I just do get the feeling that internally there was like, okay, where we are in the standing says one thing, but whatever they were seeing on the inside, or just watching with their eyes on the ice night tonight, they're going, we're still not close, not close enough.

Speaker 1:
[42:59] I'm glad you brought that up, Kyle, because that was really interesting to me, too. Like, that wasn't something he had to volunteer, right?

Speaker 2:
[43:05] Nope.

Speaker 1:
[43:07] I think, like, he, like, he makes a point of saying that.

Speaker 2:
[43:16] Yeah, he sure did.

Speaker 1:
[43:18] Yep. Pretty fascinating stuff. Boy.

Speaker 2:
[43:24] Another intriguing off-season coming in Hockey Town as the playoff drought continues for the wings. All right. Time now for the Final Thought, presented by the Toyota BZ. Actually, I went, my Uber I was in on Thursday was a Toyota BZ. It hit right in the back of one of those. It was very comfortable.

Speaker 1:
[43:43] How was it?

Speaker 2:
[43:44] Comfortable, efficient. Those electric setups, man, when they go well, they really go.

Speaker 1:
[43:53] They move, eh? Nice.

Speaker 2:
[43:54] Yes, they do. Okay. The future of NC.

Speaker 1:
[43:57] Did you say to the driver, my podcast is sponsored by this car?

Speaker 2:
[44:02] Yeah. He's like, who are you? He pulled over. He said, please get out. As soon as I said that, I was like, the ride was over. One star.

Speaker 1:
[44:11] I'm sorry. I don't drive podcasters.

Speaker 2:
[44:14] Exactly. He was not a fan. It was a hard way to find out. Halfway across the Champlain Bridge. What a bad decision. The future of NCAA sports and eligibility. It sounds like there could be a change there. How could this impact the sport of hockey? What are you hearing?

Speaker 1:
[44:39] There's been a little bit of this online. I saw a social media post about it a little bit, but I got a call from someone who works in the NCAA, and he said to me that there is something on the table, and he had a meeting with his athletic director recently, and the athletic director told him to proceed as if this is going to happen. And basically, there's a proposal right now, and if you follow NCAA sports, you know it's basically chaos. There's no rules anymore. Players are jumping from team to team all the time, and the NCAA kind of walked into this. For years, there were much different rules for players than coaches, and eventually the players started winning in court, and now we've got absolute wild, wild west. You can't even keep track of who's going where. Well, now, the NCAA is coming up with a plan to deal with this. And, like I said, his athletic director told him to be ready. And basically, what they're voting on is a five-year eligibility clock. And it is going to start, whichever is first, you turn 19 or you graduate from high school. And then whichever of those happens first, your five-year eligibility clock begins. And what they're also thinking of doing is getting rid of red-shirting. Now, if you're not familiar with that, what it means is red-shirting is you get hurt and they give you another year. Like if you get injured early in a season or something like that, you can get an extra year. That exception, they are looking at removing. And the only exceptions will be for maternity leave. If you're a member of the military and you need to leave for those reasons, or you'd go on a religious mission, like for example, a lot of the schools like BYU, Utah, for example, their players go on missions and they would have an exception. But other than that, there would be no exceptions. And they're going to vote on it. They're preparing to vote on it sometime this spring. And he's not sure, he told me, if it's going to come in next year or it'll be for the 27-28 year, it will take effect. And he also said that one of the things they're still dealing with as part of this proposal is how current players will be grandfathered in or will they be grandfathered in. So that is still being worked on. But he was told to expect a vote sometime this spring and that this is going to happen. Now, I did ask, there's been a rumor going around that you'll only be allowed to transfer once as a player. Right now, you get players transferring every year. He said that rumor is there, but nobody seems to know if that's really going to happen. But the rumor that they're going to try that is definitely true. So, you know, the reason he reached out to me is he knows that we've covered some of this stuff before about the changing landscape of the development system. He thinks if this does happen, and again, he's been told to expect it to happen, he thinks it's going to be a nightmare for the junior leagues in both Canada and the United States. He says in the US, you'll see parents holding their kids back a year, so the clock starts a bit later. And in Canada, anybody who lives here knows that oftentimes you can graduate high school now at 17. So he thinks if you are considering the possibility of an NCAA career, what are you going to do if your five-year clock starts at 17? It's a big difference between 17 and 20. And so, you know, and we'll see where it goes. I asked him, you know, they've been losing all these challenges in court. You know, that's why we're in the lawlessness that we're in now. He says that they seem to think that this will stand up in court. I guess sometime we'll see. But basically, Kyle, we are weeks, months away from a big decision here that's going to change the landscape again in North American hockey. And they and you know, a lot of this is because more of football and basketball, they are much bigger offenders on the crazy scale, but it's going to affect hockey. And he is someone who has a lot of connections in junior hockey, has been around junior hockey before. And he said that for all the junior leagues in Canada and the US, he would be very concerned about what this proposal could mean. Because we've talked about how the junior leagues are going to have to get younger and start losing players at 19, 20 years old. He's concerned for them that this could force some players to make a decision even earlier.

Speaker 2:
[49:48] Because the eligibility rules right now, like the clock starts when you enroll at a college, right? As opposed to when either you turn 19 or graduate in high school. So that would be the difference in terms of how things are now and what they're looking at. It's a really interesting one because, I mean, you think of players that would be on the radar, particularly for top programs looking for guys maybe as early as 17 years old, or 18, like right out of high school. Likely players that would be drafted pretty high. Likely players with a future in pro hockey of some kind, perhaps earmarked for the National Hockey League. How long would they be? Is it another Porter-Martone type case where you're there for a year or so and then gone to turn pro? So does it affect them as much? I wonder if the bigger hits come from, as you say, is it a player that typically would? Maybe they're a late-run draft pick, maybe they're undrafted, that would play up until their overage year in somewhere of the Canadian Hockey League and then make the jump. How does that affect what they're thinking and what options may be available to them going forward? Because the other part of the equation too, maybe those same players, you know, wouldn't have a spot on an NCAA Division I hockey team at age 17 or 18. It's a real, another one, again, as you said, for the second straight year, we're looking at this going, how is this going to affect everything? Don't know.

Speaker 1:
[51:26] Yeah, it's a big deal, though. It's a big deal.

Speaker 2:
[51:30] For sure. And we'll continue to follow that one with all the other changes that have happened in the junior hockey and development landscape over the last couple of years. That was The Final Thought, presented by the Toyota BZ. Why don't we take our first break? And when we come back, a brand new edition of The Thought Line on 32 Thoughts The Podcast. All right, welcome back. Fresh batch of the Thought Line coming at you. But Elliotte, before I get to any shout-outs, anything you want to get off your chest. Dom, did I see, is there a Sramaty playing on Team Slovakia at the U18 World Championships? And is there any relation?

Speaker 1:
[52:20] There sure is.

Speaker 2:
[52:21] A distant, distant, distant relation, but yes. Really?

Speaker 1:
[52:25] Really, what's the distant relation? How does it work?

Speaker 2:
[52:28] So there are three Sramaty families that our name originates from. And if you're a Sramaty, you come from one of those three originating members, and so we're distant cousins. Wow.

Speaker 1:
[52:41] Shot in the dark and it worked.

Speaker 2:
[52:43] You have to go back generations, but yes, we are distant, distant cousins.

Speaker 1:
[52:47] Does your family ever say, I wish you were more like this particular Sramaty?

Speaker 2:
[52:52] No. No. They, are you suggesting they should?

Speaker 1:
[52:57] I didn't suggest anything. I was just asking the question.

Speaker 2:
[53:01] Okay. All right. Well, good. And congrats to them with their upset over Canada early in that tournament. What a moment for that country. Okay. Frej, what do you got?

Speaker 1:
[53:11] Yes. Kyle, there were a few people that reached out and I didn't write them down. I think the first one I saw was an Instagram DM who pointed out that when you say you went into sports media because there was, you were told there would be no math. It's true because in the last pod, when we talked about the biggest difference between two teams that faced each other in the playoffs, I said there was a year that the Blackhawks faced the Maple Leafs, which was the same year as the correct answer, which was Canucks and Oilers. But there was a year the Blackhawks faced the Maple Leafs, where the Blackhawks had 86 points and the Maple Leafs had 57. So the difference between them was 39. I would like to thank all of you that reached out and said the difference is 29, not 39. Genius. And now you know why I owe a lot of money to the CRA, the Canadian Revenue Agency, because I'm as successful at this as I am at my taxes.

Speaker 2:
[54:17] The jig is up.

Speaker 1:
[54:18] I was way, way off, way, way off. I also wanted to shout out, there was someone who wrote in and said, and pointed out that for some reason, I can't find all the names for the people who sent me these. I don't know why I can't find them all of a sudden, but the horse Puma has reached the Kentucky Derby. We'll be running in the Kentucky Derby this year.

Speaker 2:
[54:53] Yes.

Speaker 1:
[54:54] I know who I will be putting a couple of dollars down on, the horse Puma. There was someone else who wrote in and said they were listening to a radio show from Scotland or a podcast from Scotland, and the Scottish host pronounced Puma the same way I do, which is proof that everybody from Scotland is a genius, as I've always said. I would also like to shout out Jack Manning, who covers the Golden Knights. His handle says on social media, amateur Vegas prospect nerd and lawyer. He's, but he talks about the Golden Knights all the time. And we were having our conversation about ticket stubs. He said that it's worth sharing that it takes an electric ticket to get into Vegas games, but they give everybody a paper stub on entry. I didn't know that.

Speaker 2:
[55:55] Really?

Speaker 1:
[55:56] I actually really liked that idea. So thank you, Jack, for reaching out. And finally, finally, Kyle, I would like to wish you congratulations on your fantastic photo shoot in Faces magazine.

Speaker 2:
[56:14] Oh, that was from like five years ago.

Speaker 1:
[56:17] Really? That's five years ago?

Speaker 2:
[56:19] Yeah.

Speaker 1:
[56:20] Oh, we all, how, the news travels slowly because we all saw that this week. I was sent it, I was sent it by a couple other people we work with. It made the rounds in our group chat. I will say this, I had some interesting comments from people about when Steph reposted it on Instagram.

Speaker 2:
[56:43] Thank you, Steph.

Speaker 1:
[56:45] But I didn't realize that that's five years old. I thought that was new.

Speaker 2:
[56:49] No, no. If my memory serves, it was five years ago. Then I guess just because it's playoff time, they reposted a photo from it.

Speaker 1:
[57:03] Five years ago, Kyle, you were a very handsome man. I don't know about today, but five years ago, you were definitely a handsome man.

Speaker 2:
[57:10] Well, five years ago, I wasn't doing this three days a week, so what's the correlation?

Speaker 1:
[57:15] You know what? That's a very good point.

Speaker 2:
[57:18] You know what? One thing I wanted to mention quickly, you, LastPod, said that you hope I get out of my hotel room here in Montreal.

Speaker 1:
[57:27] Did you?

Speaker 2:
[57:28] On Wednesday, I went to Bota Bota, Spa Cirlot.

Speaker 1:
[57:35] Nice!

Speaker 2:
[57:36] Yes. Went for their thermal cycle experience for about two and a half hours. It hit the spot after a long travel day and short rest doing the podcast late the night before.

Speaker 1:
[57:49] We do this with video ourselves and you do look positively refreshed and glowing. What treatments did you get?

Speaker 2:
[57:57] I just did the thermal cycle. So you go, whether it's in a hot tub or a sauna or a steam room, do that for 12-15 minutes, get the temperature up, cold plunge for a minute, minute and a half, and then it was actually a pretty nice spring day here in Montreal on Wednesday. They've got lawn chairs set up on the rooftop and at different points. You just sit there in the robe and relax for 15-20 minutes and then go do it again. It's wonderful. We know what we're doing if you and I end up in Tampa at some point. If we end up here in Montreal at any point, it would be a great team off day outing.

Speaker 1:
[58:39] People can decide who they want to win this series. Do they want to see Kyle and I eat five pounds of ice cream together, or do they want to see us sitting in a cold tub right next to each other? You decide.

Speaker 2:
[58:53] That's right.

Speaker 1:
[58:54] That sounds like a great day, man. Good for you. You deserve it.

Speaker 2:
[58:57] And for you and I, with those options, we cannot lose.

Speaker 1:
[59:04] That's right.

Speaker 2:
[59:05] That's the best part. Okay, let's get to the heart of the matter here. Travis from Regina. Hello, everyone. A thought for the Thought Line just thotted into my head.

Speaker 1:
[59:18] Okay.

Speaker 2:
[59:18] I'm watching game two of Montreal and Tampa. Tampa's first goal by Brandon Hagel. There was a brief bump on the goalie before the goal. After the goal celebration, the camera went to Martin Seyloy, looking at the iPad on the bench and looked like he might want to challenge, but he decided not to. My question is, can Montreal submit this video to the league and ask them what the result would have been if they challenge it? Can they get an answer for that? Or is it simply you snooze and you lose? My Leafs are out, and I just hope all teams have fun.

Speaker 1:
[59:52] You know, Travis, that's a great question. And the honest answer is that yes, I've heard that after games, either video coaches will call someone they know with the league or the team will submit it to the league, and they will say, if we had done this, then what would the result have been? What do you think the result would have been? I've also heard that other teams, for example, who wouldn't be involved in that game, would often send the clip in or ask, and say, hey, if this one had been reviewed, what do you think the result would have been? Now, you can't say 100%, but you generally get a pretty good answer. So that does happen. It's a great question. Maybe not in the moment, but after the game or the next day, they will ask, because they want to know, they want to know, is it worth challenging this or not worth challenging this? I also have heard that sometimes when the officials come over to the bench on these reviews, that sometimes they can ask, make kind of leading comments like, are you sure you want to challenge this when they think it's pretty cut and dried? I've been told that that has happened before.

Speaker 2:
[61:08] And don't you get the sense that like those video coaches, they got quite the database of precedent when it comes to all these different ones, eh? Like they got a pretty good, okay, what was challenged, what was reviewed the night before, just so they've got a base for their own minds of when similar calls come up in a game that they're doing. Do we got a shot? Is it worth doing? What is the league? Where in the trends been going and what similar plays have been called?

Speaker 1:
[61:35] A thousand percent that happens, Kyle. As a matter of fact, if you watched our pre-game from Thursday night, or yeah, Thursday night, I don't even know what day it is anymore. Ottawa, Carolina, after the Jordan stall, remember, everybody remembers the big controversial play in game two, the Jordan stall outside that negated the goal. I sent some notes out to some teams and they were good enough to send me some examples of similar plays that they had. We showed a couple of plays that were similar, but not exact, the stall that stood and were goals. And we showed a couple of plays that were similar to stall and didn't count. And it led to goals taken off. So these teams are watching this all the time. Yes, they absolutely have databases. I'll tell you this, like Carolina is known for having an extensive one. And them in particular, but I think everybody's kind of like that.

Speaker 2:
[62:35] Excellent. On to Adam. My idea is to encourage NHL teams to spend money and resources on developing their local hockey markets. In return, any player whose development occurred in any given teams market, that team has the right to draft them. In any given year, maybe there would be a maximum of local talent that any team could claim, maybe three players. The draft, as we know it, would still proceed. But for each team, they could hold on to their, quote, protected players that they develop. So, Connor Bedard, for example, would have been claimed by the Vancouver Canucks. This would incentivize teams in places like Florida to get serious about developing hockey, so they can compete on this level with teams in Canada and many more in various US cities where many great players come from. Now I will say, I think the minor hockey systems in the state of Florida have really come a long way from when Tampa and the Panthers first arrived on scene there. So they are doing great work in becoming much more competitive. And was this not, did this world not exist once upon a time in the NHL? Did the Canadians not have first dibs on players from Quebec, for example?

Speaker 1:
[63:48] Yes. By the way, did Dom write this question under another name? Dom, this sounds like something.

Speaker 2:
[63:57] Oh, sorry. I misread it. It's from A. Dom, not Adam.

Speaker 1:
[64:00] That's right. A. Dom in Vancouver. Not the Dom, A.

Speaker 2:
[64:05] Dom.

Speaker 1:
[64:06] Yeah. It sounds like something that you would have put in crayon and submitted to the Thought Line, Dom. So basically, you're not wrong, Kyle, that that did exist at one time. It was in... There are some people who thought it existed for a long time, but it was for about five or six years in the 60s. The Montreal Canadians had the rights to draft two French-Canadian players before anybody else could take a pick. And they did it... They didn't do it every year. They did it a couple of times. But yes, there was a time in the 60s where if you were French-Canadian, the Montreal Canadians had a chance to take you before they took anybody else. So that did exist. To make a long story very short, the way the... before the NHL draft existed, which it came in in the 60s, there was something... the way that they used to have the teams develop players or get their rights to players was something called their sponsorship list. So basically what happened was is that teams in the NHL sponsored other teams in junior organizations. So for example, the Montreal Canadiens, they sponsored teams like the Montreal Junior Canadiens. They also had the Peterborough Peets. You know, there were other teams. Detroit had a connection, big connection. Saskatchewan, that's where they got. Gordie Howe, the Maple Leafs had, you know, St. Michael's in Toronto. A lot of their great players came through there. But that's basically how it worked. They sponsored teams and they signed players to those teams. They got the players to sign forms that gave them their rights and it happened this way. Then we moved to the draft and the Canadians did have that carve out, which is if they wanted, they could take two French-Canadian players before anybody else. And then we went to a pure draft. Now, I don't think you would ever see anything like that again now. I can understand why a Canucks fan watching Connor Bedard and Macklin Sellebrini and rich teams elsewhere across North America would say, wait, this is unacceptable and we want our ability to get them. I just don't see it ever happening because there would be certain areas that would have a huge advantage and the NHL just wouldn't go there. But it always does lead to the great debate. If you had a team BC versus a team Ontario versus a team Texas versus a team say Minnesota, who would win? That competition would be great.

Speaker 2:
[67:03] Very good. All right. One final one here. Rory in Toronto.

Speaker 1:
[67:08] Is this Rory Boylan, our editor?

Speaker 2:
[67:10] I did not specify beyond the first name.

Speaker 1:
[67:14] There are days I duck Rory's calls and texts. So if he submitted something to the Thought Line to ask me to do, write an article or something like that, I would believe it. Yes.

Speaker 2:
[67:26] Hello, 32 Thoughts crew. With all the recent firings in the NHL and coaching and management, I was curious what the record is for the most games coached by a first-time head coach before getting the ax. I'm not sure if Lindy Ruff was the first-time head coach on his first tour of duty with Buffalo, but that would be my guess. Just don't tell Elliot, let him ponder this one as the raccoons invade his deck. Thanks for keeping me relevant in my hockey pools.

Speaker 1:
[67:58] That was Lindy Ruff's first head coaching job. So I have to say Rory, that would be an excellent guess. Ruff had been an assistant with the Florida Panthers after retiring before he took over the Sabres. Unless it's somebody from the original Sixh era, Kyle, I couldn't imagine anybody beating Ruff's, what, almost 16 years he coached the Sabres.

Speaker 2:
[68:21] There is one name that beats Lindy Ruff, and it's not from the original Sixh era. It's almost like their start and end dates are almost parallel.

Speaker 1:
[68:35] Is it trots?

Speaker 2:
[68:37] Yes.

Speaker 1:
[68:38] That's the only other guy. Wow, that is, first of all, a great question, Rory, if that is your real name and you're not my editor. And secondly, thanks for the hint, Kyle, because that was the only other guy that made sense.

Speaker 2:
[68:53] Yes. So 1196 games coached for trots, 1165 games coached for ruff in that span. Number three on the list, still active, John Cooper. Had 1,043 consecutive and counting with the temp of a light.

Speaker 1:
[69:11] Sorry, what's the record? 11 something?

Speaker 2:
[69:13] 1196.

Speaker 1:
[69:16] So Cooper would need two more years to break it, right?

Speaker 2:
[69:19] Yes.

Speaker 1:
[69:19] Okay.

Speaker 2:
[69:21] Yes. So he's number three. Number four on the list is what the coach of the year trophy is named after.

Speaker 1:
[69:28] Oh, Jack Adams. Okay. Yeah.

Speaker 2:
[69:31] And number five, legendary coach with the Canadians.

Speaker 1:
[69:38] Toe Blake.

Speaker 2:
[69:39] Bingo. 914 games from 1955 to 1968. But yeah, rough right up there. Trotz just hasn't beat by Elliotte's math. 31 games. Good question.

Speaker 1:
[69:58] Very good question.

Speaker 2:
[69:59] Okay. That's where we'll leave it. If you would like to write in a question like that one or any other thoughts you may have, the Thought Line is the place to do it via email at 32thoughts.sportsnet.ca or a voicemail, 1-833-311-3232. When we come back, we'll go through the games on Wednesday in the Stanley Cup Playoffs and also some music to play us out of today's episode. 32 Thoughts The Podcast continues after this. All right, Elliotte, so for the second straight game, the Oilers and Ducks, by the way, tied at a game of peace. But for the second straight night, Anaheim lets a third period lead slip away. However, it does not cost them on Wednesday. There was concern around Connor McDavid and his right leg ankle area, though he said he was fine post-game. Where are you at in the series that no lead appears to be safe? And I suppose not surprising, given what we felt about these two teams going in.

Speaker 1:
[71:14] Well, first of all, I mean, I'm glad that McDavid is okay, because you could see when he left that game and he came back initially, he looked nervous. And that makes everybody nervous. It's just bad for hockey. It's bad for the sport. If McDavid can't play, anybody can't play, but particularly him, it really hurts the overall playoff viewing experience. It's just bad. It's like nothing else to be said. It's just bad. But he really looked tentative when he came back. And we were sitting there and we were watching it. We were thinking, is he going to be able to last? And I thought Luke in particular made a great point on the really bad shorthanded goal by Anaheim, the one that made it four to two, where the Oilers just looked atrocious on the play. If McDavid was healthy, he would have just wheeled away from all that pressure, taken it back and restarted. And I remember looking at that and thinking, we could have a real problem here. But I thought by the end of the game, I don't think there were any questions. He looked like himself, he recovered, but it didn't get them the W, the Ducks won. I give full marks to the Ducks, Kyle. I didn't know what to expect from them. I didn't know if they would be just happy to be here or they would be competitive and make this a series. It's very clear the answer is B. They are competitive and they have made this a series. Seneca doesn't have a point, but I think he's been really good. Goche has obviously been very good. Carlson's obviously been very good. For a team that had 14 players in game two, playing either their first or second career playoff game, to me the most important thing is, are you competitive? You can figure out all the rest of this stuff later, but are you competitive? And clearly, they are competitive. They're not shying away for the moment. And Edmonton's power play is over right now. I don't expect that to continue. But what it does say to me is that they're detail-oriented. The thing is, in the regular season, you're not on for 82 games. You just can't be. There's travel, everything. You can't be on all the time. But in the playoffs, when you're playing the same team, seven games in a row, there's no excuse not to be on and not to be detail-oriented. So whatever Quenville and his staff is telling him about the Edmonton power play, they're on. They're detail-oriented. And again, even if it doesn't last, it says to me that this is a group of players who understands the gravity of the moment, how much harder this is, and how alert and on-your-toes you have to be, and how you have to understand that you're only focused on one team for two weeks. So you have, you better understand what their strategies are, and what their techniques are, and what their tendencies are, and this is how we're going to attack it. We may not win, but this is our plan. And what the Ducks have said to me in games one and two, Kyle, is they understand the assignment. They know what the plan is. I don't like the Dickinson thing, Kyle. You know, even when he scored two goals in game one, you could tell he was really battling. I don't know what this means. I thought it was a really bad sign he couldn't play. I just think Edmonton's lineup settles better when he's in it. We, you know, McDavid's had no points in two games. Sooner or later, he's going to go supernova and make a huge impact on this series. But, you know, the biggest thing I think we've learned through two games is that Anaheim is not happy to be here. They're in this series and they're a legit threat to win it.

Speaker 2:
[75:05] What a night for Cutter Gauthier with Leo Carson and Troy Terry. I mean, they were an absolute handful. And when that release gets a bit of room, it is very dangerous. And I'm with you, like, I'm still, I know it's just as strange as it is to see zeros next to McDavid's name, I mean, in any game, it's been back to back, and the playoffs no less. It is a little bit jarring, but I'm still not in that, okay, are we concerned about the Oilers captain just yet? The health was one thing. But if he says he's fine, I'm taking him at his word. We should mention Jason Dickinson will travel with the team down to Anaheim. We'll see what that means, whether he gets into game three or not. Adam Henrique will not. But it's a different looking line up when he's not part of it. Credit Anaheim, you mentioned, not only have they keyed in on their penalty kill, their power play has gotten them going like they are winning the specialty teams war early on, and now put themselves in a great spot coming back home. It's been that, I know you mentioned on air the other night of, okay, there's just not enough, there's not the same level of hate as maybe some other series, but it's still a series where you're feeling of you're never quite out of a game. There remains the window with how much firepower there is both ways and the way games can open up. And I think that kind of would favor Anaheim a little bit. Edmondson's still got to sort that side of it out.

Speaker 1:
[76:42] There still is going to be an 8-7 game in this series.

Speaker 2:
[76:46] Yes.

Speaker 1:
[76:47] I feel confident in that prediction.

Speaker 2:
[76:51] Okay. Dallas, Minnesota. Boy, I felt for the players, first of all, that 850 local starts, that is very tough. That is a lot to ask.

Speaker 1:
[77:05] I hate those. Look, we work for TV. This is our fault.

Speaker 2:
[77:09] Okay?

Speaker 1:
[77:09] Kyle, you and I are directly responsible for this. We schedule these. Us. Me and you. Dom, you are excused because you're not a television employee. You're part of the audio division. You don't have to take blame for this. But we sit in the boardroom and we make these calls. I feel terrible sometimes for the Central Division fans. That is a tough time slot. Tough time slot.

Speaker 2:
[77:35] And then you factor in double overtime, and it's a long night for everyone. Wyatt Johnson continues to move up the record books. Sixth game winner already in the playoffs in his young career. One off the record for players under 23 years of age. He had another big game. They were forced to come back in the third period. Some key penalty kills in overtime for Dallas, and then they get their chance. You feel for Danila Yurov with the puck over glass. The Dallas Stars reclaim Paul Meissen and Edjian, what's turning out to be a phenomenal series, as we all kind of hoped it would be going in.

Speaker 1:
[78:15] So, Kyle, I had to face a decision during this game, and I was curious to see, do you think I made the right or wrong decision? So, we finished the Edmonton game, and the Minnesota game, which we were not in studio for, was in overtime. And I watched it in my suit until the midway overtime scrape break. And then I raced to get changed, and I said, as the action picked back up, I sat in the makeup room, and I looked at it, and I said, I have a choice. I can take my chance that I won't miss the winning goal, but I will be home for overtime too, or I wait here for the rest of this first overtime, and then I probably missed the start of the second overtime while getting home. What do you think was the proper decision?

Speaker 2:
[79:14] Hmm. Well, if you're fearing missing anything, the play should be to just stay put, because you just don't know. What did you do?

Speaker 1:
[79:27] You would think that would be the correct answer, which is of course why I did the exact opposite. In a lifetime of questionable decisions, I do agree I made a questionable decision. But I wanted to get home, and I listened. By the way, Josh Bulgarad, you had a great call of that game. I listened to you as I drove back home, and Josh, outstanding, you painted a great picture. Although I will say, Josh, I was rooting against you in the sense I wanted nobody to score. I know that at late at night, Josh probably wants to go late night, have a steak, maybe a beer, game over. I was like, no, nobody score. And I did get home in time to see the winner and double overtime. But I wanted to shout out Josh for calling a great game. I got home in time. I have to tell you, so I got to read you something. I laughed when I saw this. This is from an ex-follower named Luke Affolter. Okay, this is, I got this as we were taping the pod, okay?

Speaker 2:
[80:39] When you first said ex-follower, I thought it was like someone that used to follow but no longer. Now, now I know what you mean.

Speaker 1:
[80:45] Who knows? So Luke Affolter, I got this while we were taping this segment of the pod. Disgruntled wild fan here, seeing yet another playoff disaster unfold before our eyes. Do you think there will be changes in the front office coaching and key players? I don't think people outside of Minnesota realize just how frustrated fans are. Luke, it's two to one and you just lost in double overtime. I admire your passion, but save these tweets until on the chance Minnesota loses the series. Too soon, you could still win the series.

Speaker 2:
[81:24] It's the shovel day offline.

Speaker 1:
[81:27] Yes, the shovel day offline. There's only two moods, winning and hell.

Speaker 2:
[81:32] Yep.

Speaker 1:
[81:33] That's a good point. No, Luke, too soon. I admire your passion. Without people like you, we wouldn't have jobs, Luke. Too soon. I can't believe how many penalties got called in this game. And look, a penalty is a penalty. The funniest thing, and I was talking about it with the guys on radio earlier before we recorded this, is that I went back and I watched the one that was called against Quinn Hughes, the Dallas penalty had called against Quinn Hughes in overtime. And you could see the official. It was like a fight with his arm. Would it go up or down? He was hesitating. But there were four penalties called in overtime, which you never see. One of them was the one that was the puck over glass. So it was an automatic, but there were, they ended the game. But there were three other penalties called in that game. In the overtime, Minnesota had what? Six in the overtime and the third period. If you're the wild, you get handed that. You got, you can only look in the mirror, right? And the thing that scares you about that for Minnesota is that Autinger has not been great this year. But that might be the game that, you know, when Super Mario eats the mushroom and gets taller, that could be that moment for, if you're in Minnesota, that's what you're most worried about, is Autinger has arrived. He's back and, you know, Matt Duchenne made a great play, too, to save another goal, swept it off the goal line. Right before scoring. Boy, you know, Kyle, what a vicious series. Just a vicious, vicious series. And, you know, Duchenne, like, I was looking at that play with Marcus Foligno and Foligno who was cut. Like, it didn't matter that Duchenne really didn't do anything that deserved to get punched for, but Foligno was going to punch him anyway. Like, this series is, it is nasty. All of these series are nasty. I was talking about it. Like, that game you did the other night, Tampa and Montreal, that first period was borderline out of control. That game last night was borderline out of control. We'll talk about Philly, Pittsburgh, which was borderline out of control at times.

Speaker 2:
[83:58] Almost fully.

Speaker 1:
[83:59] Fully out of control. It's amazing to me. Like, we should know by now that you can't play the 82 games in the regular season, like you play the 28 in the playoffs. But sometimes I think the officials forget that. Fans want to know that their players care as much about winning and losing at this time of year, that as they do, well, they do. And they prove it on a night in night out basis than they do. I'm always surprised how people forget that this switch turns on when the postseason starts. And they will do things to each other at this time of year that they will not do to each other in the regular season. It happens every year. And this series in particular is just a nasty, mean series. I, you know, the one thing I still think about the wild here is that when Hughes is on the ice, Minnesota dominates play. And I just think over seven games, if that trend continues, it's going to be a challenge for Dallas to win it. Because you know, the more that this goes and the tighter it is, the more Minnesota will go to Hughes. And I think at five on five, it's something like six nothing when Hughes is on the ice. Dallas is going to have to do something. I just don't know the amount Hughes plays that doubt that that's a winning strategy for the Stars. They're going to have to, he's a great player and he dictates a lot of that. But they're going to have to score some goals with him on the ice.

Speaker 2:
[85:33] Haven't you always said or at least what you've been led to believe that it's not so much the officials that change in the playoffs and to your point, it's the players, the way the game has changed come playoff time. But maybe there needs to be a bit of an adjustment on the official standpoint of maybe letting certain things go, as opposed to times in the regular season where maybe you don't have the same tolerance for it.

Speaker 1:
[85:58] You know, it's always tricky. But Kyle, sometimes it seems like some of these guys are surprised by it. Like, I don't understand. That's the thing from, oh, it's gotten really nasty all of a sudden. Well, I mean, you should expect it by now.

Speaker 2:
[86:12] What's gotten into him?

Speaker 1:
[86:13] What's gotten into him? I'll tell you what's gotten into him. It's mid-April. That's gotten into him. I think that what you can do is just penalize scrums harsher. If you want to stop scrums, I mean, look, how many games have we seen now where the penalty boxes are totally full? Buffalo Boston, Philly Pittsburgh, you know, the penalty box are packed with guys. That is clearly not, if you want to stop it, then, you know, Montreal Tampa was like that. And I don't want to curb guys' energy and enthusiasm and desire to win, but if you don't like scrums, then make an example out of somebody in a scrum and that'll end that.

Speaker 2:
[86:58] Yeah, I know. But then, anyway, yeah, it's a tightrope.

Speaker 1:
[87:03] It is a tightrope. It's just funny, like, because the players go nuclear and every year it seems people are surprised by this. I mean, you shouldn't be surprised anymore.

Speaker 2:
[87:13] Yeah, well, I think just to your point of making an example of one guy, I think there's a feeling on the Montreal side, like they kind of did that in game two with Jacki. Like, remember after the first period, they thought, oh, Montreal is going to go on the power play here to begin the second, and all of a sudden Jacki was in the penalty box. And their point was, you know, if anything, that only escalated things further. It didn't calm the waters. So anyway, there was...

Speaker 1:
[87:36] There was a weird one in the Utah-Vegas game, too, where Karkone got a penalty for like some meek cross-check. And the referee said, it warned you, and I was like, I gotta know what they warned him for, because that was such a meek cross-check. I was like, what? What was that?

Speaker 2:
[87:57] Yeah.

Speaker 1:
[87:59] That is so funny. The other thing I wanted to say is, there is an epidemic of diving again in these playoffs. An epidemic, okay? And you should see, like, apparently the stars and the wild behind the scenes are just accusing each other of diving like crazy. Like, I heard, like, I heard the stars are all over hues. I heard the wild are all over ranting and, like, they're just, they're, and diving is a real problem. I hate diving, but apparently in this series, they are just say, they are just accusing each other of diving nonstop. And I wonder if that was part of the issue with the call on Hughes in the overtime that the one official was so uncertain that he didn't want to make the call.

Speaker 2:
[88:49] It's gotten so bad, even Crosby's diving now. It's crazy. It's completely gotten out of control. Yeah, let's get to that. Philly Pittsburgh. So Brian Russ said after game three, it felt like a WWE match at times. It's been a long time since there was a playoff game in Philadelphia, 2018, the last one. And you'd think all of that is exactly playing into how the flyers hope things would go. Certainly, they're fans. It has been textbook Philadelphia flyer hockey to this point. But yes, that call on Crosby, that was embellishment that he was called on. Dan Muse said after the fact, 21 years, never gotten an embellishment call. But what were you told?

Speaker 1:
[89:35] So the great people at Sportsnet Stats, we asked during the game if it had ever happened before. And technically, Dan Muse is correct. He was never called for embellishment. But on January 7th, 2006, in a game between, this is how long ago it was, it was the Penguins and the Atlanta Thrasher's. At 1336 of the second period, Sidney Crosby was called for diving and unsportsmanlike conduct. I'm looking at the box score here. So, there is one diving penalty in Crosby's career, and, but it's the first one in 21 years. That must have been quite the game because they played Atlanta back-to-back. On the sixth, they played them in Atlanta, and they were down five-nothing, got to within five-four, and Ilya Kovalchuk scored an empty netter. Crosby got two slashing penalties in that game, and the next night, they played in Pittsburgh, so it was a troop back-to-back, and Atlanta wanted four-to-three. Again, really tight game, and Crosby got a hooking and interference. He got eight minutes in penalties that night. That was quite a night for Crosby. Maybe someday we'll get a chance to ask him about it. But that is a diving penalty that is on the NHL score sheet. So there is one previous. You know, Crosby took a lot of courtesism early in his career. I do not believe he is a diver. But I love the video of the one Flyers fan looking at Crosby in the box, and Crosby seeing her and kind of smiling. And the thing I love about that is, first of all, it was a perfect video. Just whoever trapped it, nailed it, and the director who cut to it on the camera just nailed it. But you know, that person is obviously a big Flyer fan. But for life, they're going to be a Crosby fan too, because she had that great moment with him. Like, I love stuff like that. I really do. But you know, the bottom line is, I never, I mean, I thought Philly could win the series. I didn't think they were going to be up three-nothing. And the thing is, they've earned it. They have not, this isn't a case where they're getting outshot 120 to 6, and Dan Vladaar is standing on his head. Like, they are playing great. Their fourth line has been unbelievable. Like, those guys, like, I'm really, like, Hathaway had a really hard year. A really hard year. And I love the stories of people who persevere and make it through and now, you know, look at it. Look at the, look at the year he's having. Glenn Denning is a really solid player, like a good, honest NHLer. Waiver claim this year. Couturier, we've talked about him and all the troubles he's been through. But the thing I love the most was when Xigris scored that goal and like the players in the in the penalty box are doing that circle of love or whatever they're doing. When Xigris goes right over to them first and celebrates with them, that's when you know you've got a team, right? Like that's when you know you've got a team. I didn't like the kicking. I think kicking should be harshly penalized. I do. Now there was another angle that showed that Rust kicked too. And like they weren't true kicks. Like Shane Corson once got suspended for game seven of a playoff series between the Maple Leafs and the Allenders because he kicked an Islander. And that was like that was far worse than what we saw there. But I don't like it with all the dangerous cuts we have now and the sharpness of the skates. I don't I think they should have done something. But, you know, I think that's a small point in the middle of all this. What a series. You know, I'm kind of sitting here and I'm looking at, you know, if you're dealing with Pittsburgh, you know, what do you say here? I think the bottom line is, now I wonder if they do go to Shilov's. Like, I don't think this is all on Skinner. And he did get screened on that one. But I think you have to do something to change the momentum, and you probably go to him. And, you know, you take a look at, they changed their lines. They tried some new things. Philly continues to just suffocate them. I mean, bottom line is, now it's just on your guys. Like, you have to find a way through. They've made changes. They've tried adjustments. I bet you now they're going to change the goalie. At some point, it just simply comes down to, you have to beat the other team. You just have to find a way to do it. And I think in a lot of ways, it's happened. Like, the ways that Pittsburgh scored all year, one of the top-scoring teams in the league, they're not doing it. So you have to find other ways to win.

Speaker 2:
[95:07] I'm surprised. I know there's a lot of players on that Pittsburgh side that are kind of new to the whole playoff experience thing. I am surprised as a group how frustrated they've gotten. I understand things haven't gone their way. But for allowing things to go off the rails at times, the way they have, it surprised me a little bit. A little bit.

Speaker 1:
[95:32] You know, unfortunately, Samantha, who was a great regular season player, you know, just hasn't, has been very quiet. Like, and I, and he's not the only one. Like, there's a whole bunch of guys that have been quiet. I seriously think that's what it comes down to, is that you have to say to your guys, hey, now you're understanding what it's like. A lot of the playoffs is purely about battling and fighting your way through there. Like, you've got, like, look at all the players who don't have a point yet for Pittsburgh. LaTang none, Mantha none, Girard none, Dewar none, Lazot none, Soderblom none, Kindle none, Chinakov none. These were all guys who were parts of your team and a reason that you had such a great year. And now, I think a guy like Chinakov and a guy like Kindle, those are the perfect examples. They had really good regular seasons. Chinakov looked reborn when he got traded to Pittsburgh. Well, he got hit hard early and he's finding his way. Kindle is finding his way, you know, like they're understanding what this is like. And in the long run, they'll be better off for it. But right now, they're finding out the learning curve is very deep.

Speaker 2:
[96:57] All right. So the Penguins try to keep their season alive Saturday night in Philadelphia. Tonight, three games. So I know we didn't touch much about Montreal, Tampa. Well, they haven't played since our last pod. So we'll talk about them on Monday's edition following game number four. Game three is tonight, 6.30 Eastern, the Hockey Central pre-game show, seven o'clock Friday night in Montreal. The place will be jumping for Pacific Time on CBC and Sportsnet for our listeners that are in Canada. Game three between Vegas and Utah, first ever Stanley Cup playoff game in Salt Lake City goes 9.30 Eastern Time, 6.30 Pacific Time on Sportsnet 360 and from Anaheim, a little after 10 ET, 8 Mountain Time. It's game three between the Oilers and the Ducks. Taking us out today, a track from Isaac Baronikian with songs and sold out performances that have earned him community radio play across Canada and comparisons to Jack Johnson and Bahamas. Isaac is carving out his own slice of space as a mellow sounding songwriter with relevant things to say. Coming of age in the west end of Toronto's downtown with an eclectic family CD collection of talking heads Steely Dan, The Beatles, and mid-2000s radio, Isaac spent his adolescence geeking out over music and media. Now living in Ottawa and writing to the sounds of post-Toronto indie folk recession rock, Isaac sings about the way things are and where they might be headed. With his sharp observations and soft baritone voice, Isaac's songs come across like conversations with an old friend. Couple of live shows upcoming for Isaac, May 9th at Burdock Music Hall in Toronto, and May 22nd at Redbird in Ottawa. This track along with all the others we have featured this year can be found on the 32 Thoughts The Music playlist on Spotify. Here's Isaac Baronikian and South of Hastings on 32 Thoughts The Podcast.