http://www.denverpost.com/avsmailbag/ci_17522456
In this installment of Dater's Mailbag, he half-answers another six questions with varying results. Each question gets its own individual grade... that's the sort of attention to detail you get here at GradingDater.
The first question is about whether the Avs have been too quick to give up on prospects. The questioner compares the Avs to the Red Wings, who seem to have a never-ending stream of talent coming up from their minor affiliates.
Dater takes a very weak jab at this question, giving one example (Stewart/Shattenkirk) of players the Avs may have traded too soon, but there isn't really an answer here anywhere. He then goes completely off-track to discuss Detroit, for some reason, explaining that they have "defensive problems" and "all those old guys up front." They are both odd criticisms, especially considering they've had injuries at defense but still have the probable Norris winner (again), and that their average age at forward is about 30. And at any rate, pointing out perceived weaknesses on the Red Wings really doesn't address the question about the Avalanche by any stretch of the imagination.
Overall, this was a good question that Dater essentially dodged in order to score cheap points from the Hate-Detroit crowd.
D+
The next question is about Peter Stastny's comments that the Stewart/Johnson trade "destroyed the team." Dater starts with Stastny, but then goes off on a wandering answer about how it may have been a terrible trade, but then again, it may not have. Dater basically waffles here. It's not an answer, but at least it's balanced.
C
The next question is one that I'm sure made Dater wince, as it is about Forsberg. It's a good question and one that needs to be asked: did Forsberg's ill-fated comeback create a distraction to the team?
Dater could have really provided a provocative answer here, but because it's Forsberg, he completely pusses out. He concedes that there may have been a teeny bit of distraction, but claims that
"I don't think you can ever say it was a bad thing to have Peter Forsberg around on your team."
Well, why the hell not? All the evidence you need is right there... they were playing decent hockey at the time he announced he was attempting to come back... and from that day to the day he retired, they won one game, and they're still reeling. Is it the only reason they've been losing? Of course not... the loss of Fleishmann was huge, Stewart and Duchene disappeared, Anderson seemed to pack it in... but to suggest that Forsberg wasn't a distraction is flat-out ridiculous.
Dater completely screwed up this answer, because there's no way Forsberg wasn't a distraction to this team. It was a circus that Dater helped to create... how's that not a distraction? Terrible, terrible answer to a question that really deserved more thought... but I guess Dater doesn't have to worry about Peter asking for his half of their "BFF" necklace back.
F
The next question is about why the Avs do not have a full-time goalie coach, and if it affected the team's goaltending this season. Dater answers that the Avs had Kirk Mclean as a part-time goalie coach... which is really just re-stating the question. Unfortunately, he pretty much leaves it at that. He doesn't answer the question at all... he spends as much time claiming he doesn't have a mancrush on Kyle Cumiskey as he does not answering the question.
D-
The next question asks about the Avalanche's "rash of injuries," and whether their style of play or lack of size has anything to do with it. Another good question... often, Dater picks a few creampuff questions that he can answer easily and look smart in doing so, but the questions this week were actually pretty good. Unfortunately, Dater doesn't put much effort into any of his answers, and that carries through to this one.
Dater's answer is, basically, "size doesn't matter, if it did would Liles be able to play every game?" A guy asks a question about three or four years' worth of injuries, and Dater uses one player, in one season, to support his answer. AD would have been picked apart in debate class in high school.
Marc in Dallas, if you want an actual answer to this question, try mine: Yes, the Avs' lack of size and style of play has likely added to their injury situation somewhat over the last few years. Sure, they've had perhaps more than their share of "freak" injuries (snowblower accidents, pulmonary embolisms), but they've also had plenty of garden-variety hockey injuries, too. They've decided on a team philosophy based on speed and fast-paced play, and so they've built their roster with speedy, often smallish guys to match that style. As a result, they have a bunch of small guys playing a fast style through the neutral zone and then going into the corners against bigger defensemen. The rest of the NHL knows that the way to beat a team like that is to hit them. A lot. When you're skating fast and taking a lot of hits from generally bigger players, you get a lot of injuries.
Dater closes this half-assed attempt by throwing out an "injuries are weird, everybody gets them and the Avs just have got a few more than normal" answer. As I said, this was another good question, but Dater takes the easy way out, demonstrating once again that the mailbag is a great place to get an answer to "Whatever happened to Howler" or "What is Erick Johnson's nickname" type questions, but a lousy place to get a thoughtful and informed answer to a good hockey question.
D+
The last question is regarding Ryan O'Byrne's fairly horrific injury about a week ago, when a skate came up and sliced open the left side of his face. The questioner asks, "why did the refs not blow the whistle?" Dater answers by chiding the ref crew, calling them "idiotic," for failing to blow the whistle, but I'm not so sure the blame is that easy to place.
I don't think anybody, including O'Byrne, realized the extent of that injury. In fact, O'Byrne finished his shift... rarely, if ever, do the refs stop play for a guy who is still skating. Had O'Byrne fallen to the ice grasping at his cheek, I have no doubt that the refs would have blown the whistle right away. But realistically, in a situation like that, the ref has to go by what the player is telling him, and by skating back to the slot and finishing his shift, O'Byrne was telling them that he wasn't that bad.
Now, obviously it was a bad injury after all, but that's hindsight. I think Dater is off-base here in his criticism of the refs that night... but, after being critical of his inability to answer any other question with any sort of authority, I'll give him credit on this one, at least, for picking an answer and sticking to it.
C+
Showing posts with label Forsberg goggles. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Forsberg goggles. Show all posts
Saturday, March 5, 2011
Monday, February 14, 2011
Dater's Heart Broken on Valentine's Day: Forsberg Retires
http://www.denverpost.com/avalanche/ci_17384500
I am one of what appears to be a distinct minority of fans who has been annoyingly pessimistic about the Forsberg comeback, pretty much ever since he returned from Sweden to practice with the Avalanche. I saw how he looked during the 2010 Olympics (where he was flat-out awful, to the point of hurting his team); I followed what he was doing in Sweden, where he couldn't seem to stay injury-free even playing in a league full of floppin' Swedes... and when he said he was trying for a comeback, I just felt in my bones it would not turn out well. I was worried that he'd end up discouraged, his fans would end up disappointed, the Avalanche would end up distracted, and that ultimately he'd only be good to sell tickets.
Unfortunately, I was correct on all counts except for the ticket thing, because he never even stepped on home ice in front of the Colorado fans before announcing his retirement. As it turned out, I wish I'd been right about that part, too, for at least one night, as I think it would have been a nice gesture for Forsberg to appear at least once in Denver to let his fans send him off right. The fact that Forsberg realized he could not compete did not surprise me, but it happened earlier than even earlier than I would have guessed, as it apparently took only two games to convince the man, at long last, that his foot simply could not handle the NHL game.
There were many who seemed to think Forsberg looked good in the two games he played, and I must admit that at times, he looked far better than I every would have guessed he might. But then again, there were shifts in those games where he just looked bad... not bad for Forsberg, but bad, period. He couldn't hold his own on the ice, and he couldn't defend the space around him because he was just very, very easy to push around... and if there was anything Forsberg never could be described as, it would be "very easy to push around."
Dater must have taken this especially hard, considering that not twelve hours earlier he'd publicly outed himself as a Foppa fanboy (it was always a bit of an open secret, anyway). He puts a brave face on and sucks it up, though, and offers a fairly straightforward article that builds on his observations from the Predators game (and afterward), doing a good job of convincing the reader that this announcement was a surprise to everybody, perhaps even to Forsberg himself. Dater makes good use of quotes, both from teammates and coach Sacco, to keep this article moving forward, and overall it's a pretty good effort. Yeah, there's some Forsberg love, and it's clear Dater is going to carry a torch for the guy for quite a while, but when one of the best players of his era retires, there's a spot in good journalism for a slow-motion, soft focus fade to black.
Grade: A
Full disclosure: I'm a long-time Red Wings fan first, an Avs fan a somewhat distant second. But in my opinion, Peter Forsberg in the mid-late 90s was the best hockey player on the planet, full stop. I think Sergei Fedorov came very, very close in talent, skill, and accomplishment, but overall Forsberg gets the nod. Fedorov probably surpassed Forsberg in raw ability, to tell the truth, but what Fedorov never really had was that which made a gimpy 37-year-old Forsberg fly back to Denver and practice for three weeks, just to play 30 more painful and fruitless minutes in the NHL: the absolute lust to play hockey at its highest level, and to flatten anybody who dared try to keep him from that goal. Some say that Forsberg will be missed, but I've missed the guy for years. Good luck, Peter, and thanks.
Unfortunately, I was correct on all counts except for the ticket thing, because he never even stepped on home ice in front of the Colorado fans before announcing his retirement. As it turned out, I wish I'd been right about that part, too, for at least one night, as I think it would have been a nice gesture for Forsberg to appear at least once in Denver to let his fans send him off right. The fact that Forsberg realized he could not compete did not surprise me, but it happened earlier than even earlier than I would have guessed, as it apparently took only two games to convince the man, at long last, that his foot simply could not handle the NHL game.
There were many who seemed to think Forsberg looked good in the two games he played, and I must admit that at times, he looked far better than I every would have guessed he might. But then again, there were shifts in those games where he just looked bad... not bad for Forsberg, but bad, period. He couldn't hold his own on the ice, and he couldn't defend the space around him because he was just very, very easy to push around... and if there was anything Forsberg never could be described as, it would be "very easy to push around."
Dater must have taken this especially hard, considering that not twelve hours earlier he'd publicly outed himself as a Foppa fanboy (it was always a bit of an open secret, anyway). He puts a brave face on and sucks it up, though, and offers a fairly straightforward article that builds on his observations from the Predators game (and afterward), doing a good job of convincing the reader that this announcement was a surprise to everybody, perhaps even to Forsberg himself. Dater makes good use of quotes, both from teammates and coach Sacco, to keep this article moving forward, and overall it's a pretty good effort. Yeah, there's some Forsberg love, and it's clear Dater is going to carry a torch for the guy for quite a while, but when one of the best players of his era retires, there's a spot in good journalism for a slow-motion, soft focus fade to black.
Grade: A
Full disclosure: I'm a long-time Red Wings fan first, an Avs fan a somewhat distant second. But in my opinion, Peter Forsberg in the mid-late 90s was the best hockey player on the planet, full stop. I think Sergei Fedorov came very, very close in talent, skill, and accomplishment, but overall Forsberg gets the nod. Fedorov probably surpassed Forsberg in raw ability, to tell the truth, but what Fedorov never really had was that which made a gimpy 37-year-old Forsberg fly back to Denver and practice for three weeks, just to play 30 more painful and fruitless minutes in the NHL: the absolute lust to play hockey at its highest level, and to flatten anybody who dared try to keep him from that goal. Some say that Forsberg will be missed, but I've missed the guy for years. Good luck, Peter, and thanks.
Dater's Dear Diary Entry about Road Trip, Followed By Three Pages Filled With "Adrian Forsberg" Signature Practice.
http://www.denverpost.com/dater/ci_17380837
In this article, Dater offers a brief reminiscence all the way back to the time where Peter Forsberg returned to the Avs in the midst of a four-game road trip in which the team lost all four games. Those were the days...
Basically just a couple half-done ideas thrown together into one article, this is a recap of the Avs' most recent road trip, almost entirely devoid of substance (the article, that is, not the road trip... although that's probably debatable). Dater begins by stating that never in his time covering the team has the Avalanche locker room been as quiet a place as it was following the Nashville loss. I like the way he lets the players and the room tell us how to feel here, rather than saying something like, "This team is really lost right now." Right or wrong, that would have been Dater's opinion... but by telling us what the locker room was like and how the players were acting, he actually reports what he saw, and lets the reader draw his or her own conclusion. It's good writing, and obviously, I'd like to see more of that from Dater.
No recap of this road trip would be complete without just getting lost in Peter Forsberg's baby blues for a bit, and naturally Dater obliges.
Wow. I mean, how often to you hear a reporter actually write something like, "I'm a Foppa fan boy?" Honestly, he sounds like he's past just being a fanboy... he sounds a bit like he's actually enjoying a little Foppa S&M. On more than more than one occasion, Dater has chided reporters from other teams with the motto, "There's no cheering in the press box." It certainly seems like Dater could stand to take his own advice here, although it might be difficult for him to hear it with Forsberg whispering sweet nothings into his ear. While it's certainly no secret that Dater has always harbored a massive mancrush on Forsberg, there are still some lines you don't cross as a professional journalist, and flat-out admitting in print that you're currently slobbering all over the people you are assigned to cover is one of those lines.
Furthermore, what NHL player wouldn't have a few more points if not for good goaltending or botched plays by teammates? I realize Dater is trying to get us to look past Forsberg's numbers a bit here, but this just struck me as a really dumb thing to say. Love makes you say stupid things, apparently, and on Valentine's day, I suppose we should forgive Dater this one time.
He closes by thanking an unnamed Nashville cab driver for not stealing his stuff, despite his having been somewhat rude to the guy. It is nice to see that Dater's "faith in humanity" has been restored. I wonder how long it will last?
Grade: C+. Although it did include a very nice, objective description of the Avs' state of mind following the Predators game, there is really no reason at all to have written this article. Because it is so completely useless, the Forsberg serenade doesn't seem quite as jarringly inappropriate as it probably should.
In this article, Dater offers a brief reminiscence all the way back to the time where Peter Forsberg returned to the Avs in the midst of a four-game road trip in which the team lost all four games. Those were the days...
Basically just a couple half-done ideas thrown together into one article, this is a recap of the Avs' most recent road trip, almost entirely devoid of substance (the article, that is, not the road trip... although that's probably debatable). Dater begins by stating that never in his time covering the team has the Avalanche locker room been as quiet a place as it was following the Nashville loss. I like the way he lets the players and the room tell us how to feel here, rather than saying something like, "This team is really lost right now." Right or wrong, that would have been Dater's opinion... but by telling us what the locker room was like and how the players were acting, he actually reports what he saw, and lets the reader draw his or her own conclusion. It's good writing, and obviously, I'd like to see more of that from Dater.
No recap of this road trip would be complete without just getting lost in Peter Forsberg's baby blues for a bit, and naturally Dater obliges.
Savor every single moment of this comeback, folks. I totally am. I admit it — I'm a Foppa fan boy. The man has put me through the wringer as a reporter trying to decipher his clues, but consider me a willing glutton for punishment in this case.
It'll be a long time before we ever see the likes of his kind again. I don't care what his stats are through the first two games, he's still the most compelling player to watch out there. And he easily could have had three or four points in those two games if not for good goaltending and the clumsy sticks of teammates.
Wow. I mean, how often to you hear a reporter actually write something like, "I'm a Foppa fan boy?" Honestly, he sounds like he's past just being a fanboy... he sounds a bit like he's actually enjoying a little Foppa S&M. On more than more than one occasion, Dater has chided reporters from other teams with the motto, "There's no cheering in the press box." It certainly seems like Dater could stand to take his own advice here, although it might be difficult for him to hear it with Forsberg whispering sweet nothings into his ear. While it's certainly no secret that Dater has always harbored a massive mancrush on Forsberg, there are still some lines you don't cross as a professional journalist, and flat-out admitting in print that you're currently slobbering all over the people you are assigned to cover is one of those lines.
Furthermore, what NHL player wouldn't have a few more points if not for good goaltending or botched plays by teammates? I realize Dater is trying to get us to look past Forsberg's numbers a bit here, but this just struck me as a really dumb thing to say. Love makes you say stupid things, apparently, and on Valentine's day, I suppose we should forgive Dater this one time.
He closes by thanking an unnamed Nashville cab driver for not stealing his stuff, despite his having been somewhat rude to the guy. It is nice to see that Dater's "faith in humanity" has been restored. I wonder how long it will last?
Grade: C+. Although it did include a very nice, objective description of the Avs' state of mind following the Predators game, there is really no reason at all to have written this article. Because it is so completely useless, the Forsberg serenade doesn't seem quite as jarringly inappropriate as it probably should.
Saturday, February 12, 2011
All Things Avs blog: Dater goes mental on officials for helping Jackets bully poor Forsberg
http://blogs.denverpost.com/avs/2011/02/11/postgame-avs-blue-jackets-foppa-and-the-not-ready-for-prime-time-players/6463/
This is Dater's postgame thoughts from the Avs/Blue Jackets game, which Columbus won 3-1. It is pretty standard Dater whining, sky-is-falling, these guys are pathetic/they have no heart stuff, until this point:
Where to start with this? Well, first of all, if you didn't see the game, it was actually called fairly even. The Jackets had two power plays, and the Avs had one. That's not saying it was called well, but it was called the same for both teams, and in hockey that's about as much as you can ask for. The Stastny call he mentions was not a great call considering the things that were not called, but neither was it as innocent as Dater makes it out to be. As in ANY hockey game, there were missed calls, but the officiating didn't figure into this game at all.
Dater seems to not have noticed that Forsberg pretty much grabbed Pahlsson by the back of the neck and pulled him to the ice; the way he remembers it, Forsberg was "wrestled to the ground behind the play." In fact, if this game had been called the way Dater apparently wants to see it called, Forsberg would have probably taken at least as many penalties as he drew... he played the same sort of game he always did, which frankly I was happy to see. Forsberg gives as good as he gets, and that apparently hasn't changed, floppy ankles and all.
Am I saying that criticisms of the officiating are improper in a newspaper setting? Not at all... but there is a professional way to go about it, and there's a rabid homer fanboy way to go about it. That Dater chose the latter is the issue here.
There was zero professionalism in this entry... it starts with a Dater standard: "I usually don't (blank), but..." and then he goes on to do exactly what he says he never does. If also featured Dater's typically snotty tone, a real journalism no-no. It included personal insults -- including, incredibly, a charge of xenophobia -- directed at Walkom (apparently Dater does not realize that there were two refs on the ice allowing Forsberg to get mugged, as Walkom gets 100% of his wrath here). He threw in an unnecessary sideswipe at Pahlsson, sarcastically gave the officiating the first star of the game, and he topped it off by donning his tinfoil helmet to assert that the NHL has put crooked officials in place, apparently in an effort to ensure that the league will thrive by allowing skilled, star players to be easily neutralized?
I mean, seriously... how cranky is Dater on this one? So the refs missed a couple calls. Did it really warrant 250 bile-filled words for a game between two second-division teams? But he really went for broke here, and I'm not sure why, because as I said earlier, the officiating had no bearing on this game. The difference here, I think, is that Saint Peter was on the ice, and therefore any and every missed call involving Forsberg is a Crime Against Hockey! Dater ultimately comes across here as the unabashed Forsberg fanboy he really is.
The rest of the entry reverts to the tone it started with: no-insight, cliche comments like "I question [Stastny's] fire to win," and "Where is the emotion out there?" Basically, this blog entry is an insight into nothing more than all the things Dater was cranky about before going to bed last night. I suppose there is a place for that in the blogosphere, but I fail to see how it fits in with professional newspaper coverage of the Colorado Avalanche.
Grade: F This useless yet oddly entertaining blog entry includes a classic Dater rant, reminiscent of the anti-ESPN rant from a few years back. Too bad that he didn't put nearly as much thought into this as he did then... the ESPN rant was silly, but at least there was an actual argument in there somewhere if you took the time to peel away the junior-high taunts and name-calling. This is just frustration... if the team is frustrated, report it. I don't really care, however, if Dater is frustrated.
This is Dater's postgame thoughts from the Avs/Blue Jackets game, which Columbus won 3-1. It is pretty standard Dater whining, sky-is-falling, these guys are pathetic/they have no heart stuff, until this point:
Referee Stephen Walkom didn’t dignify the proceedings tonight. I try to stay away from analyzing the referees, but they do a job just like any other guy out there and deserve to a look once in a while. Walkom let a few blatant calls go tonight, some involving Forsberg. Overrated, overpaid Sammi Pahlsson pulled his usual clutch and grab, hit’em-after-the-whistle routine once tonight on Forsberg, and old-school, time-has-passed-him-by Walkom just swallowed his whistle and let Forsberg get wrestled to the ground behind the play.
Guys like Walkom should do the hockey world a favor and retire, because he doesn’t know anything about today’s faster game and how to call it. He seems to want every game to go back to the clutch-and-grab disaster it was prior to the last lockout, and that ain’t the way it’s done any more Steve.
Better to take that league pension and go back to the backwaters of the sport you so clearly miss. Nobody else in the modern world does. But one of Walkom’s good ole Canadian boys, Rick Nash, got looked at crossways by American Paul Stastny in the second period tonight and Walkom blew his whistle and administered a slashing penalty – a slashing penalty, on a guy whose stick never actually touched Nash? Yessir, two minutes in the sin bin for Stats, while more rodeo hockey could ensue on guys like Forsberg without consequence.
So, first star tonight to Stephen Walkom, for giving us all a nice circa 1998 game out there. Well done, NHL marketers.
Where to start with this? Well, first of all, if you didn't see the game, it was actually called fairly even. The Jackets had two power plays, and the Avs had one. That's not saying it was called well, but it was called the same for both teams, and in hockey that's about as much as you can ask for. The Stastny call he mentions was not a great call considering the things that were not called, but neither was it as innocent as Dater makes it out to be. As in ANY hockey game, there were missed calls, but the officiating didn't figure into this game at all.
Dater seems to not have noticed that Forsberg pretty much grabbed Pahlsson by the back of the neck and pulled him to the ice; the way he remembers it, Forsberg was "wrestled to the ground behind the play." In fact, if this game had been called the way Dater apparently wants to see it called, Forsberg would have probably taken at least as many penalties as he drew... he played the same sort of game he always did, which frankly I was happy to see. Forsberg gives as good as he gets, and that apparently hasn't changed, floppy ankles and all.
Am I saying that criticisms of the officiating are improper in a newspaper setting? Not at all... but there is a professional way to go about it, and there's a rabid homer fanboy way to go about it. That Dater chose the latter is the issue here.
There was zero professionalism in this entry... it starts with a Dater standard: "I usually don't (blank), but..." and then he goes on to do exactly what he says he never does. If also featured Dater's typically snotty tone, a real journalism no-no. It included personal insults -- including, incredibly, a charge of xenophobia -- directed at Walkom (apparently Dater does not realize that there were two refs on the ice allowing Forsberg to get mugged, as Walkom gets 100% of his wrath here). He threw in an unnecessary sideswipe at Pahlsson, sarcastically gave the officiating the first star of the game, and he topped it off by donning his tinfoil helmet to assert that the NHL has put crooked officials in place, apparently in an effort to ensure that the league will thrive by allowing skilled, star players to be easily neutralized?
I mean, seriously... how cranky is Dater on this one? So the refs missed a couple calls. Did it really warrant 250 bile-filled words for a game between two second-division teams? But he really went for broke here, and I'm not sure why, because as I said earlier, the officiating had no bearing on this game. The difference here, I think, is that Saint Peter was on the ice, and therefore any and every missed call involving Forsberg is a Crime Against Hockey! Dater ultimately comes across here as the unabashed Forsberg fanboy he really is.
The rest of the entry reverts to the tone it started with: no-insight, cliche comments like "I question [Stastny's] fire to win," and "Where is the emotion out there?" Basically, this blog entry is an insight into nothing more than all the things Dater was cranky about before going to bed last night. I suppose there is a place for that in the blogosphere, but I fail to see how it fits in with professional newspaper coverage of the Colorado Avalanche.
Grade: F This useless yet oddly entertaining blog entry includes a classic Dater rant, reminiscent of the anti-ESPN rant from a few years back. Too bad that he didn't put nearly as much thought into this as he did then... the ESPN rant was silly, but at least there was an actual argument in there somewhere if you took the time to peel away the junior-high taunts and name-calling. This is just frustration... if the team is frustrated, report it. I don't really care, however, if Dater is frustrated.
Avs/Jackets Recap
http://www.denverpost.com/avalanche/ci_17366280
An article on the Avs' 3-1 loss to the Blue Jackets. Aside from the to-be-expected Forsberg love-fest in his first game back with the Avalanche (i.e., "it seemed like the Avs' only truly dangerous scoring moments came when he was on the ice," and "...Forsberg — alone with the puck near the top of the left circle, sent a cross-ice pass to a cutting Kevin Shattenkirk that was as good as any Elway-to-McCaffrey timing pattern"), Dater basically offers a straight-up recap here. Although Peter Budaj had a very solid game, Dater only mentions him in passing... had Anderson played that well, he'd likely have had an entire paragraph about it, but seeing as how Dater pretty much ignored Budaj's play one way or the other, further comments on Dater's Budajhate will have to wait for another day. I doubt it will take too long.
With the already noted exception of the Forsberg Goggles being firmly in place (although even Forsberg received a soft chiding for being "...a little late getting back on defense prior to Nash's shot and goal"), Dater sticks to facts here, and allows quotes from Avs players and coaches to set the tone of the article.
Frankly, Forsberg did look pretty good with the puck on his stick, but a more thorough coverage may have also noted how slow he was on his feet, and how easy it was for BJ defenders to push him around, hold him against the boards, etc.. As far as Forsberg being the "best player on the ice," I don't know if I agree with that. The Avs played another decent game, particularly defensively (relatively speaking, of course), but couldn't get any really solid scoring chances. I still think they are on the right track, and will start winning some games soon, perhaps tonight.
Grade: B+ Some Forsberg fellating for sure, but even in proper journalism that is allowable considering the circumstances, the audience, and the build-up to his return. Generally informative, balanced, and light on the editorializing.
An article on the Avs' 3-1 loss to the Blue Jackets. Aside from the to-be-expected Forsberg love-fest in his first game back with the Avalanche (i.e., "it seemed like the Avs' only truly dangerous scoring moments came when he was on the ice," and "...Forsberg — alone with the puck near the top of the left circle, sent a cross-ice pass to a cutting Kevin Shattenkirk that was as good as any Elway-to-McCaffrey timing pattern"), Dater basically offers a straight-up recap here. Although Peter Budaj had a very solid game, Dater only mentions him in passing... had Anderson played that well, he'd likely have had an entire paragraph about it, but seeing as how Dater pretty much ignored Budaj's play one way or the other, further comments on Dater's Budajhate will have to wait for another day. I doubt it will take too long.
With the already noted exception of the Forsberg Goggles being firmly in place (although even Forsberg received a soft chiding for being "...a little late getting back on defense prior to Nash's shot and goal"), Dater sticks to facts here, and allows quotes from Avs players and coaches to set the tone of the article.
Frankly, Forsberg did look pretty good with the puck on his stick, but a more thorough coverage may have also noted how slow he was on his feet, and how easy it was for BJ defenders to push him around, hold him against the boards, etc.. As far as Forsberg being the "best player on the ice," I don't know if I agree with that. The Avs played another decent game, particularly defensively (relatively speaking, of course), but couldn't get any really solid scoring chances. I still think they are on the right track, and will start winning some games soon, perhaps tonight.
Grade: B+ Some Forsberg fellating for sure, but even in proper journalism that is allowable considering the circumstances, the audience, and the build-up to his return. Generally informative, balanced, and light on the editorializing.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)