Boston v. Chicago: My series pick

I've long wondered why it is that Football and basketball can draw such strong ratings, mostly from fans who don't actually belong to any of the teams in the championship games, but hockey is unable to do so. Obviously, the two sports are more popular and much more widely played in the U.S. But what stumps me is why hockey fans, for the most part, stop watching hockey once their team is eliminated. I’m certainly not immune to this myself. Over the past few seasons I've tried to change this.

After a sufficient mourning period for Detroit's collapse against Chicago, I've emerged from my bunker. I did watch some of the conference final games, but have to say I was a bit let down by the one-sided results. However, the short round means we'll have two rested teams, looking like they're at the top of their game in the finals.

Before the playoffs started I thought Boston had the best chance to come out of the East, and that is was a coin flip between L.A. and Chicago in the West. I gave the Kings a slight edge, given their excellent possession numbers. However, by the time the conference finals rolled around, Chicago had moved ahead of the battered Kings in that area.

Now that my cup pick (L.A.) has been eliminated, I have to go with Chicago. It’s hard to say how the final will play out, given that the conferences did not play each other this year. Chicago was easily the best team of the regular season, in a year when they only played the West. Of course, with my West Coast bias, that simply makes Chicago's season even more of an achievement. But this also puts me at odds with most of the experts.

Boston’s dismantling of the Penguins was impressive and I think that’s what is driving the pundits to pick them. However, the Penguins have always been a very top heavy team. And more recently, prone to childish meltdowns. The Pens’ stars have to be the best players in the series for them to win. Chicago, on the other hand, has the depth to match, and exceed, Boston’s.

The biggest challenge of the playoffs for the Blackhawks came from the Red Wings. Detroit shut down the top stars for Chicago, in much the same way that Boston did to Pittsburgh. Boston may be able to better execute the Detroit game plan. Zdeno Chara and Patrice Bergeron will surely be giving Jonathon Toews flashbacks of Niklas Krownwall and Henrik Zetterberg. But Chicago prevailed despite their stars limited production by getting timely goals from Bryan Bickell, Andrew Shaw and the rest of the crew.

Boston has the edge defensively and in the net. But not by a mile. And Chicago has more players who can put the puck in the net, which ultimately is what wins games. It should be a closely contested series, but I believe Chicago will find a way to be the victor.

My hope is that the games are interesting. In my new effort to watch hockey for the pure enjoyment of the game I’ve struggled. I need a team to root for. But these two teams are not exactly easy for me to like.

The case for Boston

If you’re a regular reader of this blog, you may recall that I outlined reasons to cheer against Boston at the start of the season. But here are some reasons to cheer for Boston.

• Yes, Mr. Burns still owns the team. But Boston is going against one of Detroit’s oldest rivals, which just happened to be the team to send the Red Wings home this year. Also, somehow Rocky Wirtz is sticking to the story that he is still losing money on the Blackhawks. Either Wirtz is an amazingly incompetent businessman (he does own an NHL team, so entirely possible), or he’s just lying and trying to make it look like the lockout was necessary (again, he does own an NHL team …).
• Wouldn’t it be great to see Tuukka Rask prove he’s every bit as good as Tim Thomas? Imagining Thomas sitting in his mountain bunker, considering how he gave up another cup ring and probably 10 percent of his total career earnings, (just to get away from, I don’t know, health care for poor people?) that is delicious.   
• Patrice Bergeron plays hockey the right way, and he may finally get some recognition as being the best all-around forward in the league.
• The Bruins got their biggest scare from the Toronto Maple Leafs, who happened to have traded them Rask in exchange for Andrew Raycroft (not to mention the trades that brought in Dougie Hamilton and Tyler Seguin). So at least the Cubs of the NHL could watch players they should have kept win the cup.

 

The case for Chicago

 

• On the other hand, an easy win by Chicago might give me some satisfaction knowing that my team pushed them to the brink. Might.
• I’ve got family who would be really happy with a Blackhawks win, so there is that.
• Another ring would pretty much cement Patrick Kane into his off-season training regimen of getting super wasted all summer. I have a feeling Deadspin is hoping for this too.
• Isn’t just about everyone tired of Boston teams winning championships?
• Chicago is a more important market for the NHL than Boston, so a second title in four years could be what’s needed to tighten up those seat belts on the bandwagon.
• I’m a Western conference snob and Chicago winning would re-enforce my bias.
• Marian Hossa would get another ring, making up for those back-to-back finals losses a couple years ago. I have a soft spot for this guy. Hossa learned by being traded from Ottawa to Atlanta to Pittsburgh that this is a business and the teams are more than happy to talk about loyalty right up until they hand you your ticket out of town. When Hossa finally had a say in where he wanted to play, he turned down tens of millions for a one-season shot at winning a title. He could have had a career ending injury and never recovered the money he passed up. He decided winning was more important than money.

Ultimately, I can reason all I want, but I won’t know who I really want to win until I start watching the games. Sports are irrational.