Blackhawks win, and so did we

As the insane ending to game six of the Stanley Cup Final was playing out, my wife looked over at me as the seconds ticked down, a hint of a smile entering her face. "Wait, does this mean hockey is over?!" I have to say, I understand where she's coming from. With the lockout pushing the finals into late-June, it was way too nice outside to be thinking about a sport played on ice. Or whatever that slushy substance was in Boston.

I, on the other hand, felt a pang of melancholy, knowing it'd be three months before the pucks again are dropped. At least one good thing to came out of the lockout, and this is absolutely the only good thing: the offseason will be shorter than usual. In fact, that Blackhawks have hardly finished their parade and the focus of the hockey world is already moving on to buyouts, trades and the entry draft on Sunday.

I will get into some of that in future posts, but before that, here's a few last thoughts on the cup final.

I liked Chicago's kung fu better

I was not certain who I would cheer for before the final series began. In the end, it was Chicago, pretty much for the reasons I outlined. But another reason I'm happy the team won is because I like the hockey Chicago plays. They use speed, stretch passes and a mobile, attacking defense to create numerous and exciting scoring chances. I'd much rather watch teams try that than Boston's clogging/grinding style.

When parity rules, depth is the MVP

It was a curious year for the Conn Smythe trophy with no clear No. 1 on the Blackhawks. I saw quite a bit of Chicago's playoff run and I really think the two best players start to finish were Bryan Bickell and Patrick Sharp. Both players scored timely goals, and while much was made of Jonathon Toews and Kane being reunited on a line in game four, I think the true turning point was Bickell moving back to the top line. Had the series gone seven, I think you could have even made a case that Tuukka Rask could have pulled off the rare, losing goalie Conn Smythe steal. Since the votes were cast with 10 minutes left in the game, Bickell's final exclamation point of the playoffs was not taken into account. I had a feeling the select few voters would instead give the trophy to a star and so I'm kinda, sorta glad it went to Patrick Kane.

The reason? Part of me suspected they would somehow figure out a way to give the trophy to Toews. He was great defensively and his lack of scoring probably had more to do with bad luck than anything. But to be the MVP you have to score goals, play 30 minutes a night or carry your team to the cup with outstanding saves. And he just didn't do any of those. The other candidate I thought was possible was Corey Crawford. While he certainly did enough to win the cup and played very well, at no point did I feel like he was stealing games for the Blackhawks. Of course, that mostly had to do with the fact that the Blackhawks didn't put themselves in that position. So yay, Kane! Third consecutive American to win the MVP.

Rub some 'tussin on it

During the final, I kept thinking about this:



And this:



Obviously, you can't really compare NBA and NHL toughness. But I can't help thinking about these two moments every time I watch some hockey player tough it out with much, much more serious injuries. But are teams letting players go too far? If you haven't yet read Nick Costonika's excellent column on the topic, you really should. When guys are spending days in the hospital after playing in elimination games like Rocky and Apollo after their fight, it's time to consider whether someone should have stepped in before things went that far.

Who makes it back next?

With Boston and Chicago vying to be the first post-lockout 2.0 cup repeaters, I was wondering which team would make it back next. Both teams will need to retool a little bit. At this point, I'm assuming that Bickell and Bolland are both gone for Chicago, even with the buyouts to Steve Montador and Rostislav Olesz. After that playoff run, Bickell will have to leave a huge chunk of change on the table to stay in Chicago. He's saying he wants to stay and will take a discount, but I don't think he understands just how much money GMs are going to be throwing at him. There are five teams in the league right now whose 2013-2014 payrolls are below the minimum salary cap number, meaning they're required to spend more on salaries. On the flip side, with Chicago's expiring contracts they need to fill five roster spots and have just under $8 million in cap space to do so. And Crawford and Nik Hjarlmarsson and entering the final years in their contract and could be looking for raises a year from now. I don't think the roster overhaul will be as dramatic as the last cup run for the Blackhawks, but they will once again have to shed depth.

For Boston, I expect bigger changes. They have a little more cap space (almost $10 million), but need to add six players to the roster. And two of their unsigned players are two of their best: Rask and Nathon Horton. They've already said they will part ways with Andrew Ference and Jaromir Jagr, and I would expect Horton to follow. Perhaps of most concern for Boston is that Zdeno Chara finally started to look human these playoffs. This is not too surprising considering that he'll turn 37 next year. But if the not so gentile giant starts to break down, Boston is still stuck with big Z for five more years and $31 million. Could the captain be headed for a buyout after next season? Boston will need to make some tough decisions over the next year and it's going to be fascinating to see how it shakes out.