PK on Broadway: Rangers Game Preview and Open Thread

Tonight, PK Subban gets to take his mega-watt smile and polarizing demeanor to the city that never sleeps as the Habs take on the Broadway Blueshirts. Will Montreal be another smash hit like Billy Elliot, or will they end up with a trail of broken bodies and bad reviews like Spider-Man: Turn Off the Dark?

Curtain, Lights: 7:00 pm at the "World's Most Famous Arena" (cough, cough - not because of you, Rangers - cough cough) on RDS, actual full nation TSN, and the MSG network. Habs have actually won three of four, while the Rangers have taken three straight.

Names above the marquee: Do you get the feeling PK would be on a Times Square billboard already if he wore a Ranger's jersey?  At the very least Don Cherry would love his moxie rather than call him uppity. Eyes are on him and the Whizzer (6 points in 6 games as a Hab) as nearly the last men standing on the Habs blueline. Scott Gomez (he of the 13 points in his last 12 - it's true!) returns to where he signed his massive contract in the first place. He should be up for this. All Star Carey Price is always center stage because this team can't score, but it looks like understudy Alex Auld goes tonight. Understudy Lars Eller also gets a game in place of lead tenor Squid. For the Rangers, Brandon Dubinsky is the new Ron Duguay, leading the team in scoring and swooning ladies in the crowd. Marian Gaborik is ever dangerous but currently ice cold. All Star King Henrik Lundqvist remains one of the NHL's best and All Star Marc Staal is quickly becoming a game-changer on defence.

Bit players: Rangers made a move for some offence to cover for the season ending injury of Alex Frolov by acquiring Wojtek Wolski for "much-maligned" defender Michael Rosival. With all New York's injuries, guys like rookie Derek Stepan and Artem Anisimov have been getting some valuable minutes. Captain Chris Drury will never live up to his contract (signed the same day as Gomez) but Rangers fans seem to have accepted him. Habs need much more from supposed headliners Pleks and Big Tits; both are in prolonged slumps and there isn't a lot of help coming from the bottom two lines so it's far more noticeable.

Your understudies will be: Weber is in because Markov and Gorges are out for the year. Eller is back in as Squid fights off "flu-like" symptoms. Rangers could cast an entire production with their injury list, as Vinny Prospal, Derek Boogard, Ryan Callahan, Erik Christensen and Alex Frolov are all definitely out, and former Habs first-rounder Ryan McDonagh is questionable. Wolkski may have to play defence and wing to make up the shortfall.

Playing the fool as always: Sean Avery. Still around, still an asshole. Sigh.

Scathing reviews courtesy of: Interesting look at the business of hockey through the Rangers over at BlueSeatsBlog. Wait, there's a blog that isn't run by snarky, photoshopping weirdos with a penchant for swearing? Yep. Good for them.

Aprés show entertainment: Um, it's New York. If you can't find something to do aprés show in New Freaking York, I can't help you.

Montreal, Toronto, Empty Seats and Empty Shells: You Don't Have a Clue, So Please Shut Up About It

There are a lot of weak, weak writers out there. You expect that in the age of the interwebs because now any twit with a modem and a working knowledge of a language (like the average Bruins fan) can set himself up with a blog and write nonsense. The problem is compounded when the "mainstream media" features its own cabal of weak writers; put all the not-very goods in too close a proximity and you get all sorts of stupidity, made-up arguments, convenient twisting of facts, and (usually from us) some childish name-calling that leads to a very uncomfortable awkwardness at the Blueshirt Bulletin summer cotillion.

Wait, it gets longer.

Last year, one of the weakest of the weak mainstream media, (Howard Berger - no links because he don't deserve it) wrote an item about a (probably mythical) conversation he had with a Montreal cabbie. Said cabbie claimed Torontonians were stupid for supporting the Leafs through thick and thin, and that if they all started to stay away from games like they did in Montreal when the team was struggling, Leafs management would be forced to improve the team. Leafs nation went batshit. Over at the CoxBloc (an excellent site that keeps a very critical eye on the weaker links of the mainstream, with a special emphasis on the above mentioned Berger, as well as the Star's Damien Cox and the Sun's Steve Simmons, among others) they wrote a reply. The reply is well thought out. The comments section is where things get a little iffy, as Toronto fans bend over backwards trying to prove a) that Montrealers didn't voice their opinion on the state of the Habs by staying away from games and b) the same strategy would never, ever work in Toronto. Why is this an issue? Because, based on absolutely nothing, Pension Plan Puppets has dragged this argument back into the light, and the same stupid, misinformed, mind-numbingly wrong facts are being thrown out there again.

Damien Cox wrote this piece. Read it. Read it again. Tell me where he even mentions the "stay away until management gets the hint" argument. He doesn't. He does say this:

"5,000 to 6,000 seats were unsold most nights and the team was in the midst of missing the playoffs four times in five years."

Now, from that line, PPP seems to glean that Cox is advocating staying away until Leafs management gets the message and builds a winner. Wait, what? Let's see ... nope, just read the Cox article again. Doesn't seem to be the gist of the piece at all. Nevertheless, PPP uses that as the jumping off point for a rehashing of the misguided arguments and misconstrued facts he and other Leaf bloggers have to prove that a) no fan revolt ever happened, and b) if there was any fan revolt, it certainly wasn't noticed by Montreal management and had no bearing on management's willingness to change things to get better.

Now, the house of cards basis of proof PPP and the rest of the Barilkosphere (their awesome word, not mine) use to prove that Habs fans didn't vote with their wallets is based on a comparison of average attendance figures and percentage of capacity totals from 1993 to 2007. On first glance, these totals might seem to support the theory, as the Habs average attendance figures are higher than those of the Leafs each year. Now, this conveniently neglects one very important fact. As I wrote in the comments section of the CoxBloc article:

"citing "average attendance" figures to show more Montrealers were showing up versus Torontonians is a little misleading since the Forum had 17,959 seats to MLG's 16,307 and the Bell Centre fits 21,273 to the ACC's 18,819. Going back to 1993-94 on PPP's chart, Toronto's percentage of capacity is higher almost every year, even factoring in the curiosity factor a new building would bring to Montreal's totals."

(Kind of a convenient piece of info to ignore, since it pretty well ruins your argument. Lawyers do that and get disbarred. Bloggers do it and get lauded by anyone who doesn't actually pay attention.)

While PPP and his brethren might claim that 97.5 or 94% capacity doesn't sound like Montreal turned its back on the Habs, but that still translates into over a thousand empty seats each night in a hockey-mad city. It also doesn't tell the story on the streets of Montreal: I lived there from 1997 to 2001, and I remember the Habs being raked over the coals every day. I remember a brand-new arena with hundreds of seats for $15.00 that wasn't selling out. I remember fans booing the Habs off the ice on a regular basis. Maybe to PPP, 1000 empty seats a night doesn't sound like much, but in hockey-crazed places it should never happen. You can bet George Gillett and Pierre Boivin noticed. Was it a full-scale revolt? Were the Habs playing to Atlanta sized crowds? No, but in 2000 I was able to walk to the box office and purchase 4 tickets for Mario Lemieux's first game back in Montreal in almost 4 years a week before it happened. That wouldn't happen now. (Before PPP points out that the Habs were still in the top two for average attendance most of those years, I'll repeat: 21,273 seats. Bigger than any other rink in the league. Almost 1000 seats bigger than the next biggest, in fact. Oh, hey, that's the same amount of seats that were going empty every night!)

Now, PPP makes the point that the real turnaround for the Habs happened when Boivin and Gillett went and hired Bob Gainey, and he gets no argument here on that point. But one wonders, if the rink was packed to capacity every night despite the ineptitude of the front office, despite the putrid performance of team trotting out the Trent McCleary's and Karl Dykhuis' of the world, despite the lack of playoff births, let alone playoff successes, would the impetus to go out and get one of the best in the game have existed? It sure didn't when the Molson's had essentially given up and left Ronald Corey to his devices. It sure wasn't an issue for Harold Ballard to hold onto Floyd Smith or Gerry McNamara. It never seems to bother the owners of the Cubs in baseball or Detroit Lions in football (up until two weeks ago), but it sure seems to have been at least one catalyst for the change in Montreal. To shrug off the idea that 95% capacity is good enough in any of hockey's leading cities, and that 1000's of empty seats and a backseat to the Alouettes as the city's darlings was acceptable to George Gillett is disingenuous, naive, or just being blind to the fact that fans can sway opinion through their actions.

Would it work in Toronto? As PPP points out, the sheer amount of corporate dollars in Toronto and truly massive fanbase (yes, I can admit it ... the Leaf fanbase dwarfs EVERYONE else, and there is no sense denying it) suggests that it won't. That's not the crux of the issue here. The issue is a misinformed pointless retelling of a situation that you weren't in on the ground level for. "The Montreal Myth" isn't the version Pierre Boivin tells you ... it's the one the Leaf Nation tells itself.

The Impossible is Made Possible - Habs 6, Rangers 5 (SO)

This post is coming to you a bit later than usual because I haven't moved since Jaromir Jagr lost the puck on the shootout in front of Cristobal Huet's crease. I have sat stunned, motionless. My family has come down to the basement to get me into fresh clothes. They try to indulge me into eating something. Maybe wash and shave the growing beard that is slowly appearing on the contours of my face. I'm lost in a daze, frozen in disbelief. Maybe I'll move. Maybe one day.

For the moment I have to acknowledge that in over 25 years of watching hockey I have never seen Montreal involved in a more remarkable regular season game. This isn't the incredible 10 straight wins in overtime that vaulted the team to championship glory in 1993. It's not the improbable 1971 comeback against the Bruins that saw the Habs trailing 5-1 in the second period, only to roar back and win the game 7-5, eventually defeating Boston and winning the Stanley Cup. But for whatever it wasn't, it was fascinating. Just incerdible to watch.

I think the best way to sum this game up is by way of analogy my fellow male brethren may comprehend all too well.

Ranger goal: 1-0 - You get into a nightclub on a Saturday night. You've been looking forward to this night for a while. But you just don't feel right. You should have gotten that haircut, you know it now. Your shirt's a bit off. Maybe you should have worn a belt, your pants are sagging and contributing to an overall feeling of droopiness.

Ranger goal: 2-0 - Your dance moves are definitely off tonight. No rythm whatsoever. Do you revert to the running man? No, no of course not , dammit! That garlic bread should have stayed on the plate where it belonged. Crap, this wasn't the feeling I had hoped for. There's still time to turn this around. It's only midnight. Three more hours to go.

Ranger goal: 3-0 - I can't believe it's already five past midnight. What the hell is happening to my mojo? You go to the bathroom and find that the hair on your head has opted for the pubic look. It looks like a cross between Little Richard and Paul Giamatti. You apply the old water to flatten trick to no avail. You'll have to live with it. But it's dark out there so maybe the girl you've been eying with the revealing décolleté won't notice it.

Ranger goal: 4-0 - Décolleté definitely noticed the thing your hair has been doing all night. She looks at you from afar and can't resist a chuckle. You are too clueless and off your game tonight and mistake her mocking for flirting. You go over to her like the pending catastrophe that you are. You offer to buy her a drink and order two vodka sodas from the bartender. Her look of confusion doesn't tip you off in the least.

Ranger goal: 5-0 - The bartender returns with your bill and tells you your credit card has been declined. You forgot that your rent cheque had gone through leaving you with 1.23$ in your account - savings. Beads of sweat start to form on your forehead as you realize that your night has just collapsed in total misery.

Habs goal: 5-1 - You look so wounded and pathetic that Décolleté girl takes the bar tab and pays for the drink. She laughs at you and says "Put all your money in those RRSPs, didn't you?" and turns away. She said something. She said it to you. Can you say anything to respond? Anything? "Nah, not married, no need for RSVPs". Her look of confusion grows larger still.

Habs goal: 5-2 - Totally unaware of the retarded comment you just made you decide to press on. Décolleté girl appears constricted, wanting some space and generally unresponsive. She's now got her back turned to you and there's really nothing you can do but sip on that drink. Slowly. If only you could have a cigarette like days before which allowed you to look like you were doing something besides feeling like a total moron. At least it made you look like you felt cool. In those days, it made you look occupied. But you notice that Décolleté girl hasn't left your side. She could have.

Habs goal: 5-3? - Décolleté girl is dancing at the bar with her friends. She hasn't said a word to you since you offered her your RSVP advice. You don't know what to do with yourself. Screw it, I'm going for the Running Man. You gauge the space required to launch into such acrobatics and, after careful calculations, you move into a full Running Man, oblivious to the fact that the DJ is playing Fergie's Big Girls Don't Cry. The contrast makes you look ridiculous. Décolleté turns around to see the folly that is unravelling behind her. Slowly you hear mounting laughter and cheering in the crowd. Decolleté girl draws inspiration from the crowd's reaction and begins to view you in a different light; sure you smell like garlic and your hair looks like Carrot Top's after chemotherapy, but you have personality, you've got something.

Habs goal: 5-4! - Décolleté girl follows your lead and lets herself go. You're totally riding the crowd's support. You've got them all doing the Running Man. She's dancing with you unaware of time, the people around her in the Running Man, despite it being a dead dance and all. She's just looking at you. She moves her arms around your neck and lunges in (is this starting to feel like a Penthouse letter?) to show you what dancing is really all about.

Habs goal!!! 5-5!!!!- Décolleté girl is grinding you on the dance floor like lean beef. She's all yours tonight. You know it, she knows it and so does everyone else in the room. You're panting your garlic breath all over her and she's wondering if you have any more of those rasberries with you; you can do no wrong. The bar breaks into WOOP! There it is! It's only a matter of time.

KOIVU GOAL - HUET STOPS JAGR HABS WIN 6-5!!!!!!!! - This has to be the best sex you've ever had. You guys have been going at it in your room for over seven minutes. Her legs are kicking up on your HE-MAN posters. By the power of Greyskull, you say to yourself, out loud, this has to be the most improbable night of your life.