Simmer and Gabby 3

[00:00:13] Speaker A: Greetings. Oh, my gosh. It's time for a Simmer and Gabby podcast. Rob Simpson from Vancouverhockeyinsider.com, and, of course, the illustrious, the immortal Bruce Boudreaux, coach of many NHL hockey teams, champion at many levels. By the way, last week you referenced the Memorial Cup. Did you win it just the once? [00:00:36] Speaker B: No, I was lucky enough to win it twice. [00:00:38] Speaker A: Twice? I was thinking maybe you did twice as a think. [00:00:42] Speaker B: Yeah, I think we would have had a good chance of winning it three times, but the WHA came in and took Mark Howe, and it took Marty Howe, and it took Tom Edger, and it took Wayne Dylan away from us all in one year. And those would have been four pretty good juniors for that next year. To add to a stable of John Tennelli, who was a rookie, and Mark Napier, who was a know, we would have had quite a good team. [00:01:10] Speaker A: I think this is the marlies. [00:01:12] Speaker B: Yeah. [00:01:14] Speaker A: Damn, you guys were loaded. We're doing 27 minutes this week. It's in honor of number 27, and I'll let you go first. Pick a number 27. [00:01:26] Speaker B: Well, the obvious one is Darryl Sittler. I mean, a captain, a guy that I really grew up or played with and almost idolizing. But I'm going to pick Frank Mahoblic, because when I was a kid, he was my hero. When I was seven, eight, nine years old, when he was playing with the Leafs and we would catch few games on TV, but I mean, many games on the radio, he was the big M, the guy that scored all the goals. I still remember to this day in 67 when he got traded to Detroit, that I wrote in every one of my textbooks at school, I'll never like the Leafs again. I'll never like the Leafs again. On all the pages. Like how we change our tunes after a while. [00:02:16] Speaker A: Oh, yeah. I remember watching when he was with Detroit, I was probably about six years old, and I ran into him. I was doing a TV shoot for Leafs TV in the Palm Desert. Going to Jimmy Pappen's house. And we finished the interview, and Jim Pappen goes, oh, you should pop by the golf course with us later because Peter and Frank Mahoitz are here today. I'm like, Serendipity, one stop shopping. So we talked to the Big M and Peter, who's hysterical, and then I ran Frank before the hall of Fame induction last year, was just shooting the breeze with him for about 20 minutes. I'm like just hanging out with the senator. He's quiet, but he's a delightful guy to speak to and obviously a legend. I'm going to go with Scotty and Edemaer for my number 27. Not a bad choice. You had him as assistant coach. Tell me about that experience with Anaheim after he got done playing. [00:03:06] Speaker B: Well, Scotty is one of the best people you're ever going to meet, and loyal, and as the day is long and I'm taking away his hockey ability. But as a soft spoken coach, it was like he was very cerebral. He didn't talk a lot, but when he talked, it meant something. And you would definitely mean matter of fact, when it came time in Minnesota to look for a mean, it's funny, the I mean, he told me to phone. Who did he tell me to phone? [00:03:46] Speaker A: Scotty. [00:03:47] Speaker B: What's his name? I'm losing my mind here. The last name. His defense partner in Jersey. [00:03:53] Speaker A: Stevens. [00:03:54] Speaker B: Scott Stevens. Yeah. [00:03:55] Speaker A: Who you did hire? [00:03:57] Speaker B: Yeah, who I did hire, who I was getting, who I wanted to get. He said he wanted to get back into hockey type thing. So that was great. And then it was funny, as luck would have mean when I was first going for the Vancouver job that he had talked to me, I talked to him that he might want to get back into coaching and he would be interested if I ended up getting a job. As it turned out, when I did get the Vancouver job and Scott was the first person I talked to, he had just gotten a promotion from Anaheim where he could still live in BC and do the job. And so he said he'd much rather do that. His always problem was he's so involved with his kids and the family that coaching is so time consuming, but. [00:04:55] Speaker A: A. [00:04:56] Speaker B: Guy that you could respect so much and every player listened to him. I mean, he had a profound effect, I'm sure, on Hampus Lindholm and Cam Fowler. These young guys, Josh Manson, they've all got Scotty Niedermeyer's fingerprints all over them. [00:05:18] Speaker A: Yeah. Unbelievable player, obviously, as well. Three cups in Jersey. You mentioned him playing in Jersey. He won the cup in seven under Randy Carlisle with the Anaheim Ducks, a member of the Triple Gold Club, which is a Stanley Cup, a world championship gold and Olympic gold medal. He was a consmyth winner, a Norris Trophy winner. Just an unbelievable player. I think he actually won a Memorial Cup in 91 with Canada as well. He basically won everywhere he went, everything he touched. He was an unbelievable skater. And as you mentioned, a BC guy. He was born in Edmonton, but immediately almost moved to BC. His brother Rob was born in BC. They were raised in what is now a ghost town in extreme northern interior of British Columbia. It's not even a town anymore. It was a mining town. [00:06:03] Speaker B: Oh, I didn't know that. [00:06:05] Speaker A: Yeah, it's incredible, the background. But anyway, that's Scotty needemier. So number 27. We're going 27 and we've eaten almost five minutes of our 27 talking about the boys. But that's okay. Let's talk about D, and let's talk about defensemen that aren't Scott Stevens and Scott Needemeyer. And I'm going to go to Edmonton first. And this is going to get us into an argument about power plays versus even strength. So the Darnell nurse $9.25 million per season contract through 29 30 might be, in my mind, one of the worst in the National Hockey League. They score one goal, even strength, in two games against Vancouver. Of course they rely on their power play. And what does that say to you? First of all, let's talk about the fact we were joking last week. Toronto versus Edmonton. Final. How about a Toronto versus Vancouver final? The way it's looking right now, pretty damn nice start for the Canucks. [00:07:00] Speaker B: It's a great start by the Canucks. And to me, not the first game. The first game, I think Edmonton was reading all about themselves and how good they were and they just didn't show up. And you knew that with the starts that Vancouver had had the last few years where they got into trouble and if they had better starts, then obviously I think they would have made the playoffs last two years. So they were ready and Edmonton was too busy reading about their press clippings and then the score obviously was eight to one. The second game, edmonton, you knew, would be ready and they were ready and they outshot them 40 116 or some silly number like that. I don't know if that's quite accurate. [00:07:47] Speaker A: 30 616, 37 30 816. [00:07:49] Speaker B: Yeah, something like I think he made 38 saves, but I think he had 40 shots or something. So, I mean, now Edmonton was more of Edmonton, but again, they've always just relied on the power play. When we had them in the first game last year, we had a three nothing lead and then their power play came out and they scored a goal and then they scored another power play goal and then they scored a four on four goal. Their special teams was tremendous and that's what they rely on. And that's why I keep saying if McDavid and Drive Title have to play 25 minutes plus every night, then they're not going to be successful because I think their goaltending and their defense is suspect. [00:08:39] Speaker A: It is suspect and we saw it under pressure against Vancouver in that second game and they've plugged in some guys that have worked out. Obviously, Casey DeSmith making all the saves that you mentioned, but Sam Lafferty is a speedy physical, power hard to the net guy who does exactly that with the game winning goal. So that's a pretty nice grab. [00:08:59] Speaker B: Yeah. Oh, no, it was a great tried to we wanted them last the previous year, but that wasn't going to happen. But they got them this year and that's a good move for them. [00:09:11] Speaker A: Yeah, flip real quick for us and we'll get back to the power play versus even strength here in a second as my dog is barking. But talk about the Toronto Maple Leafs and are they similar to Edmonton in that regard? A bit deeper, but they still rely on special. [00:09:28] Speaker B: I mean, I think they don't rely on them as much because they are deeper. I mean, they do have a better concept of playing defense. I think they were fifth in the league in defense last year, something of that nature. But they do, they had the second best power play in the league last year, and by everybody's standards, Austin Matthews had an off year. Well, he's not having an off year start, I can tell you that. He's got six goals in first two games. It took him twelve games to get six goals last year. So if he's scoring three goals a game, the rest of the team is going to chip in for one or two, and that's going to be more than enough. I don't like the fact that the Leafs have given up right now, ten goals in two games. But if you can give up ten goals in two games and win both of them and you can correct your faults your way ahead of the game because most teams can't overcome those things. [00:10:29] Speaker A: Is their ratio of kind of like, not as solid d in goaltending compared to their outstanding offensive abilities similar to Edmonton? [00:10:41] Speaker B: Absolutely. The first two lines are so dynamic with both of those teams, and it falls off after just especially when Nugent Hopkins has moved up to the second. It's I think that's where the difference mean. Samsunov, I think, has proven that he can do the job. Skinner had a really good first half of the year. Campbell. The reason he's not in Toronto is because they didn't think he was good enough to keep there in Toronto. So I give the edge the Leafs in goal and the edge to the Leafs on defense. And the top six forwards are both teams are as elite as you can. [00:11:26] Speaker A: Get in the NHL as an NHL head coach. Gabby, did you ever get immediate buy in, and then can you think of an example where it took a while to get buy in? Because for me, half the battle for a coach is to get everybody on the same page and buying in, and obviously that can take time as you transition into a new job. But is there examples of like, boom, you just kind of had that chemistry and camaraderie and commitment and other times. [00:11:52] Speaker B: Where it was like, well, in Vancouver we started out seven, and so the buy in was right there. I think we 70 and one. We lost in the shootout in game eight to La. But in Washington it was instant buy in. We were in last place and we got there. We ended up winning the division. I think it was more difficult in Anaheim because I didn't know any of the players. I had no history with anybody except for George Peros, and he didn't play a lot back then. He's a fourth line guy that was in and out of the lineup, but it took about two weeks, two and a half weeks to get them totally on page in Minnesota. It started right out from the get go. We ended up with 110 points that first year, but we were tied for the President's Trophy league trophy up to March. And then once the trade deadline hit, we had a really bad march. But I mean, other than that, I've had good buy ins from teams and I think it's important that when you're coaching that the reason you're the coach halfway through the year is because they weren't getting the buy in from the other guy and so they made a change. Now you come in and the players know the onus is now on them. Almost every time you look at the papers or the media after a coach gets fired and the players will come out and say, well, that was on us, we didn't perform and those things. So when the new coach comes in, they got to do it. Or for the most part, it's not going to be the coach that goes right away, it's going to be the players that start to go after that. So it's pretty easy when you come in as a secondary coach to get the buy in because players are looking for something they can believe in, the players that aren't playing good or anything, it's like a new start for them. If I was going to say this in golf terms, it would be like you had a crappy front nine and now you get a chance to do better on the back nine type situation. So, I mean, there's a lot going on there, but I think the buy in is really important. [00:14:17] Speaker A: I'm glad you brought up the golf analogy because I was going to bring this up when we're talking about the Seattle Kraken with John Forsland and we'll get a little bit more about Forzey here in a few minutes on the power play topic. But the Seattle Kraken right now are kind of one of those teams. You know your golf game as amateurs. When your short game's going, you're not getting off the tee or your drives are good and your putting is good, but you can't hit a fairway iron. [00:14:41] Speaker B: Which is why we're amateurs. Yeah, right. [00:14:44] Speaker A: And it's like in hockey, it's like, can you get your power play working at the same time your DS work and at the same time you're getting good goaltending. And I think of Seattle right now because Grubauer was excellent the first two games and their new acquisition call up Joey Decord wins the backup spot. He was incredible in game three. They've scored a grand total of two goals over the course of three hockey games and that type of thing is going to happen. How tough is it just to like right now? Edmonton obviously is not putting it all together. Obviously Toronto and Vancouver are, but is that kind of a phenomena is that a good analogy? [00:15:26] Speaker B: You know what the difference is? How you're playing the coach and management team can determine, we're just not playing good goaltenders, holding us in, or you could be doing this and playing the right way, doing everything, but you can't score. And that's when you say you stay the course and you eventually get out of it. And I'll give you an example, and I know it's of one of my teams, but we started off my last year in Anaheim, one seven and two. But we got shut out five times or something in the first ten games, but we were losing one nothing, two to one. We were playing the right way. We ended up in that year leading the league in power play and penalty killing, and I think the west in goals for and goals against. So, I mean, you stayed with it okay, and it turned around because you kept reinforcing to the players that we're doing the right thing. Eventually it'll turn around. And it did. But, I mean, there's times if you start and you're getting outshot 41 to 18 and the goalie is keeping you in the game or something, and you look like you're in disarray, it's time to change things up a little bit, and that's when you start worrying a little bit. [00:16:49] Speaker A: I want to jump back into the whole power play versus even strength, because I don't think buy in is necessarily an issue with Edmonton or Toronto. I think, as we've pointed out, they're just so stacked and they're so dangerous with the man advantage. So the Central not Central, the Champions League in Europe decided to revert back to the 1950s and put the perpetual power play back into place. So, in other words, two minute power play. You can score as many times as you can before the guy comes out of the box. They also instituted the if you're shorthanded and you score, the penalty comes off the books. It's like a reward. You score shorthanded, guy comes out of the penalty box. Two different issues, two different rules. Let's start with the perpetual two minute power play, and I want you to listen to what John Forsland, the national broadcaster, play by play and also Voice of the Seattle Kraken, had to say about that. Topic number one. [00:17:47] Speaker C: First of all, I can't stand power play hockey, okay? I just don't like it. It all looks the same to me. The teams run the same routes, same plays. It's just better players. A lot of the Edmonton Oilers, what do we want them to be? 60 70% on the power play. Isn't 50 or 40 good enough? [00:18:09] Speaker A: 1956, summer of 56. They changed the rule for this exact reason, the Montreal Canadiens are rolling through power plays. Jean Beloveau had three goals in, like, 40 seconds on the power play. So that summer of 56, they go, okay, enough is enough. You score a goal, the guy comes out of the box, as you pointed out. Why would you go back plus you ruin the game. [00:18:33] Speaker C: Ruin the game if you score three in the game. [00:18:35] Speaker A: When a power play, some of the. [00:18:36] Speaker C: Best responses in the game are when you get scored on in the power play. If you're ticked off about the penalty, you're angry. You're ticked off because you got scored on, you're angry. So the next chef, you're throwing out either your top guys or your energy guys, and you're going right back at them. What are we going to do? Stay on it again and then have a cheap way to stretch out a game. And then we have no game. Then we go from two nothing to four nothing and the game's over. Now they sit on a four nothing. That stinks. If they do that, it's completely wrong. All right? No one will listen to me. But that's ridiculous. [00:19:14] Speaker A: They should listen. [00:19:15] Speaker C: I hope it shows its loss. [00:19:17] Speaker A: It's fantastic. [00:19:18] Speaker C: They'll stretch out the game. The Oilers can put the game away. [00:19:22] Speaker A: It would suck. [00:19:23] Speaker B: It would suck. [00:19:24] Speaker A: Like you said, two nothing becomes four nothing. It's like, oh, goody, now we have to come back for four goals because they got a power play. [00:19:30] Speaker C: I hate to pick on them because they're an excellent team and there are neighbors and we're divisional foes and there's bad karma if you save things, but they live off the power plays, proven until proven otherwise with an average defense and average goaltending. But they can be an elite team because of that. So now if you give them that opportunity, it feeds a lion. I don't like it. [00:19:53] Speaker A: So a pretty passionate appeal from John Forsland, who we have a simmer in Forsland podcast for the Seattle market, but we also talk a lot about the entire NHL that's Seattlehockeyinsider.com but pretty passionate about. Why would you let a hockey team dominate in one element of that's not five on five, it's not real hockey when they're maybe mediocre in other areas and he brings up the fact that last year Edmonton's D again and goaltending was like, yeah, and they're winning hockey games on the power play. [00:20:28] Speaker B: Pretty frustrating. I agree with John, too. I mean, you can't do that. There's a reason they changed the rule in the 50s when Montreal had those powerhouse teams that won four cups in a row. I mean, they could score two and three goals on the power play. Games out of reach all of a sudden. So I just imagine when I'm listening to that, that you take a ticky tack little hooking penalty or a slashing penalty in the neutral zone or anything, and a team gets three goals on you, and that little penalty cost you the game because it's too difficult to come back for the most part. So I think the power play is a reward for another guy taking a penalty, and the reward is scoring a goal. That's the reward. It's not scoring three goals. The reward is scoring one goal. And I mean if the penalty is so severe that it's a five minute major, then they say, okay, yeah, you want to be stupid? Then you can sit there and take as many goals as you want. So I think the reward system there is great. As far as the third portion of that question, I think it would be interesting. I don't know if it would work, but the concept of if you score a short handed goal, especially when you think of how many shorthanded goals are scored in the league per year, per team, that the power play would be wiped out. I think that's interesting because every time you got behind a goal, instead of putting out your best defenders, you might put out your best offensive guys to try to score the goal. So a goal is going to be scored one way or another. Usually you put out your best players offensively, they're usually not your best players defensively and not willing to block shots and do all of those things. So that would be interesting to see and it would be a good reward for the shorthanded team if they scored. They also wipe out the power play. But I mean the first portion of that question is definitely a no no to me. I hope they don't even think about it. And like my good friend John Forsland said, he was passionate. I thought he was going to come outside the microphone there and start yelling because you know what, john first started with me in 1986. We were in Springfield together and our team couldn't score a goal in the power play if our life was on life support. But I mean, he's a great guy and I really think he knows his hockey too. So I agree with him. [00:23:13] Speaker A: Yeah, he knows his stuff. In fact, last time we chatted, right before the season, he said the Kraken were going to have trouble scoring. Well, here we are, three games into the season. [00:23:22] Speaker B: Well, if you look at their scoring shooting percentage from last year, it was way above expected and that is not a trend you want to continue with that. Very rarely can you continue with this. I think whether they owe two and one now, to start three. It's an uphill climb. It's not hard to do, but you want to get above the 500 mark as quick as you can to give yourselves a little bit of safety net in case everybody's going to have those four game losing streaks and you don't want to do it when you're under 500. [00:24:02] Speaker A: Yeah, well, they'll stick to the game plan for now as they come home with their season opener this week on Tuesday night. But yeah, Johnny's great and he's got things nailed down. I want to bring up just for the benefit of everybody, canadian teams have improved. Calgary remains a little bit of a mystery, but we're just underway. Vancouver's coming out, gangbusters. Edmonton's. Edmonton, Toronto's. We talked about. What's with these Ottawa Senators right now? [00:24:30] Speaker B: I don't know. I've watched both their games. The first game they jumped out to the lead and couldn't hold on the other night. Or mean, I thought they played well and they did win, but they didn't win anywhere near as convincing as I thought they would. But I really like their team, especially if they get the Norris and the holdout guy back. If they get those two guys back, then that solidifies their center ice position. I mean, Chickrin was minus three his first game and that was the biggest thing I was worried about was his defensive play. But he answers it with two goals yesterday in the first period. He's got a heck of a shot. I mean, their defense is as mobile as anybody's and if they can get the goaltending, I think they'll be there for them. I think Montreal is still a work in progress. I thought they were good, but against, you know, on the third game of their road trip and to start, I mean, until it settles in, everything they do is about Badard anyway. It has nothing to really do with Chicago, but Montreal won last night. But I thought they looked really bad in the second and third period against Toronto on opening game. But again that's first game jitters and everything else. But I don't think in the tough Atlantic Division that they will be a factor come March. That's my guess. I think it's always better when Montreal is in it. So I hope they are in it, but I don't think they will be in it. That's just my opinion. I thought Winnipeg has looked really good both games they lost in Calgary, but I thought they thoroughly outplayed Calgary and they beat a tough Florida team that coming off a loss in Minnesota. But they had over 40 shots on mini and I thought Winnipeg dominated. So I think it's like a load off their shoulders from everything that was transpiring last year from the beginning of the year on, as far as how the room was, who the leadership was, what about this contract and that contract. I think everything is settled and when you look at their lineup, I think they got a pretty good team and they're going to be tough to beat. I do always thought Calgary was a better team than they showed last year and I think they will be there in the end. And Edmonton is Edmonton. They will find a way to all of a sudden win 15 out of 20 and I think their power play will carry them a lot. Or when McDavid gets his role going and starts getting three and four points a game, it's going to be interesting. Vancouver, they've got a great start and there's no mean if they can keep getting the goaltending like that. And it's the key to mean I don't care how good your team is if you can get really good goaltending. And Vancouver got it the first two games. And I mean, I thought it was a great Floyd play to Smith yesterday, let him get right into the action and in a really tough building, knowing that they would be coming out and playing him. And now they go into Philly and with the potential of having a 30 start, so good for Vancouver, by the. [00:28:06] Speaker A: Way, winnipeg, it was the room, a lot of it. I took little jabs at that in articles over the last two years, having some conversations with insiders in Winnipeg and to move on. Blake Wheeler was a step and now all of a sudden, here they have Scheifeley and Hallebuck re signed. So great news for the folks in the peg. We're going to hear that sound. That is our final buzer, which tells us, believe it or not, Gabby, we have blown through our Frank Mahovich, Scott Meena Meyer, 27 minutes. But here's our parting shot and it's not necessarily, it's not a happy one. And I've written about it on Vancouverhockeyinsider.com as part of the Simmer Sunday Nine, and that is Barry Melrose, who happened to be your number 26 a week or two ago. He steps aside from television with Parkinson's diagnosis, and I know Barry pretty well from going to his house and doing a profile of him years ago. Tough business. [00:29:06] Speaker B: Yeah, I mean, the one thing I do know about Barry, he's a fighter and Steve Ludzick has Parkinson's as well. And they're both fighters and they will continue to fight the good fight. And I hope Barry relaxes and doesn't need the stress of work now and he will live a long and long life from now on. But one of the best men I ever met, especially early on in my mean, you ever see that, what kind of cartoon it is, where you got the little dog and the big dog and he's my buddy, he's my budy. That was with me and Barry. I was always this little guy that he would slap around and make jokes about, but nobody came near me or Barry would protect me. And that was when we first started out together. And I'll never forget him. I mean, he's a wise man beyond his years. He's as funny as they can get. There's nobody funnier, and he's got the best laugh in the world. So, I mean, I hope he gets the chance to do that laugh much more. I just hope he gets to do it a lot more. [00:30:18] Speaker A: Yeah, I think he will. I think he will. I think that was the old George is my friend. George is my friend. Yeah. All the best to Barry and his family. And that's it. Simmer and Gabby, we got a boogie. Gabby, outstanding as always. It goes by awfully fast because, man, we could have gone double with some of these topics, but we're good. We'll save them for next week, and we look forward to seeing you and enjoy all the hockey action. [00:30:44] Speaker B: All right, sounds good.