Old Guy Without a Cup rankings, 2026 edition: Narrowing down a stacked field

It’s OGWAC time, as we celebrate one of the best running subplots of any NHL postseason: The Old Guy Without a Cup. That grizzled veteran who's done it all over a long career, but has yet to get their name on the sport’s most hallowed trophy. Can they finally win the big one? Will they run out of time? Will they get the first pass from the team captain, and if so, will they cry? Will we all cry?

You know the drill. The greatest OGWAC story ever told was Ray Bourque back in 2001. Teemu Selanne’s was pretty great. So was Lanny McDonald way back in 1989. Then again, we’ve spent years pumping the tires of OGWAC legends like Joe Thornton and Joe Pavelski, and they never got their happy endings. Nothing is promised in OGWAC world.

Our criteria for being “old” remains the same as past years: An old player will be at least 33 years old when the Cup is awarded, and must have at least ten seasons of NHL experience. The older the better, and that’s especially true if the player has had some agonizing near-misses in their history. Ideally, our candidates will be playing an important role for a team with a legitimate shot at winning it all.

We’ll try to work in a candidate for as many teams as we can, and we’ll limit ourselves to a max of three picks from any individual team. We’ll start at 20 and work our way down to year’s best OGWAC.

>> Read the full post at The Athletic

Remembering 10 stars who lost their best Olympic opportunity in 2018 and 2022

We’re about to hit a whole bunch of important Olympic milestones. The NHL break starts tomorrow night. The first preliminary round games are next Wednesday. The medal round starts two weeks from tomorrow. Construction on the arena should be finished shortly after that.

The point is, this happening. And that’s big, because as every hockey fan knows, the NHL hasn’t been to an Olympics since 2014.

That’s 12 years ago, which is a long wait for fans. But it’s also a big gap for the players – big enough that some legitimate stars have seen their peak come and go since the last time they had the opportunity to play on the world’ biggest stage. We’re talking about players who were almost certainly good enough to make an Olympic team, but just never got the chance.

Let’s recognize a few of those guys today.

>> Read the full post at The Athletic

(Want to read this post on The Athletic for free? Sign up for a free trial.)

2025 Old Guy Without a Cup rankings: Brock Nelson, John Tavares, Ryan Suter and more

It’s tough times for OGWAC fans.

I won’t sugarcoat it. It’s been a bumpy year for us here in the OGWAC world. For those of you who are new, that would be Old Guys Without a Cup, the beloved NHL playoff trope that’s served up classic stories like Ray Bourque, Teemu Selanne and Lanny McDonald. Everyone loves an OGWAC story – especially one that ends with a Cup.

It happened last year, with Kyle Okposo. He won his first Stanley Cup at the age of 36, in what would turn out to be the final game of his 17-season career.

But while seeing Okposo get his lap with the Cup was a great moment, it’s been largely downhill since then for the OGWAC community. We lost Joe Pavelski, the patron saint of active OGWACs, to retirement. We’ve also said goodbye to Zach Parise, Sam Gagner, Blake Wheeler and Mark Giordano. And this year’s playoff field means we can’t root for names like Chris Kreider, Anders Lee or Tyler Myers.

That said, change can be good, even when it comes to old guys. All those absences should clear the way for some new names on this year’s list, and maybe a few older ones that we haven’t seen in a while. Let’s see where this takes us.

The criteria remans the same as previous years: A player is “old” if they’ve been in the league for at least 10 seasons and will be at least 33 when the Cup is awarded. The older the better, and while we’ll consider everyone, we prefer OGWAC stories that feature players who are actually contributing, preferably to a legitimate contender. Bonus points if the player has had an agonizing near-miss or two in their past.

I went into this wondering if all that turnover meant we’ve even be able to find 20 names, but that didn’t turn out to be a problem. Let’s start the list, and see who earns the top spot that Pavelski held for the last few years.

>> Read the full post at The Athletic

(Want to read this post on The Athletic for free? Sign up for a free trial.)

Giroux? Burns? Kessel? Revisiting some of the toughest HHOF calls among active players

It’s Hockey Hall of Fame time, with the class of 2022 being honored all week leading up to Monday’s big induction gala. Roberto Luongo, Henrik and Daniel Sedin, Daniel Alfredsson and Riikka Sallinen are all worthy honorees in the player category, and the Hall is finally recognizing Herb Carnegie as a builder. It’s a great chance to look back and reflect on some true greats.

It’s also a chance to look ahead, and try to figure out which players might join Luongo and friends in the Hall some day. That sort of debate is half the fun when it comes to a hall of fame, and I’ve never turned down an opportunity to weigh in. One of my favorite pieces to write each year around this time is the one where I take a look at some active players and try to figure out if they’re on a HHOF path.

I’m going to do it again this year, but with a twist. Rather than coming up with new names, I’m going to revisit a half-dozen players that I’ve looked at over the years. Each of them was a borderline call at the time, and each is still active today. We’ll look at where their case stood a few years ago, what’s happened since, and whether they’re trending up or down. Then we’ll head down to the comment section, where you will yell at me about my wrong opinions and be mad that I didn’t include your favorite non-active player in a post that is only about active players.

As an added bonus, I’m also going to enlist some impartial help. Paul Pidutti has developed a model to produce “a comprehensive measure of HHOF worthiness” for players, based on a variety of factors including stats, honors, international play, longevity and peak. He’s been tweeting his player cards from his Twitter account at @AdjustedHockey and his web site at AdjustedHockey.com includes a detailed explanation of how the system works. No model is perfect, obviously, but it’s fun to be able to look at a case from a different angle, and Paul has graciously agreed to check in on our six candidates and share what his numbers say.

---

Phil Kessel

The last time we looked: At the end of the 2018-19 season, Kessel’s last with the Penguins.

The case at the time: Kessel had two Cup rings and a Masterton, had been robbed of a Conn Smythe, plus he was on pace to “cruise by the 1,000-point mark, maybe by a decent amount”. He was also just three years away from breaking the ironman record held by Doug Jarvis.

My verdict back then: I didn’t see him making the cut, partly because I couldn’t see anyone on the HHOF committee really going to bat for him. I did write that “if he can keep scoring near a point-per-game rate for a few more years, he’ll make it interesting”.

What’s changed since: Kessel spent the last three seasons in Arizona, which was great for his poker game but didn’t exactly boost his visibility. His numbers have been OK, but he hasn’t had the sort of late-career boost you might hope for. He still hasn’t hit that 1,000-point plateau and might not get there this season, and 500 goals is no longer in the realm of possibility.

That said, Kessel’s case has two things working for it. First, he’s on the Golden Knights now, and they look like a legitimate Cup contender, so another long playoff run could resurface his case. More importantly, he did indeed break that ironman record, although it belonged to Keith Yandle instead of Jarvis by the time Kessel got there. He’s about to become the only NHL player to ever hit the 1,000 consecutive game mark, which is pretty ridiculous for anyone, let alone a guy who spent his whole career being told he was an out-of-shape schlub.

Which way the case is trending: The ironman record gives him a signature accomplishment to build his candidacy around. But the offensive numbers have slowed more than we’d hoped, and at 35 we can’t pencil him in for much more production like we could a few years ago. Even with the record, I think his chances have dipped.

>> Read the full post at The Athletic

(Want to read this post on The Athletic for free? Sign up for a free trial.)

The Athletic Hockey Show: The Battle of Alberta lives up to the hype

On this week's episode of The Athletic Hockey Show:
- The Battle of Alberta returns, and immediately gets crazy
- The Rangers and Blues almost steal one, but neither team can finish it
- Who should be favored in Tampa/Florida
- Jesse Granger on the Knights finally firing Peter DeBoer
- Scoring is way up in the playoffs so far
- Listener mail on the difference between John Tavares and Claude Giroux, this week in history and more...

The Athletic Hockey Show runs most days of the week during the season, with Ian and I hosting every Thursday. There are two versions of each episode available:
- An ad-free version for subscribers that you can find here
- An ad-supported version you can get for free wherever you normally find your podcasts (like Apple or Spotify)

The Athletic Hockey Show: The season's first pink slip

On this week's episode of The Athletic Hockey Show:
- The Habs fire Claude Julien
- Were Ian and I wrong about Marc Bergevin?
- Our bets on which coach might be next
- Which team's success is the biggest surprise, Chicago or L.A.?
- Jesse Granger on this year's fantasy league-winners
- Neutral site games, the other Gretzky trade and more...

The Athletic Hockey Show runs most days of the week during the season, with Ian and I hosting every Thursday. There are two versions of each episode available:
- An ad-free version for subscribers that you can find here
- An ad-supported version you can get for free wherever you normally find your podcasts (like Apple or Spotify)

Filling out a World Cup roster for Team Canada’s B-Team

We’ve spent the last week or so on this site having some fun with the World Cup. Or rather, with the lack of a World Cup, since the NHL in its infinite wisdom has apparently decided that hockey fans don’t want to see best-on-best tournaments anymore. We’re not so sure about that, so we’ve been coming up with our best guess at what the various rosters would look like if the World Cup were revived.

That’s always a fun exercise for any country. But it gets especially interesting for Team Canada because the country continues to produce more talent than anyone else. No matter who you pick for a roster, you’re going to end up leaving out a bunch of stars who’d be easy picks for pretty much any other team in the tournament. Sometimes, it feels like Canada could do pretty well with a second entry.

So let’s do that. We’ll scratch off all the names that wound up on Eric Duhatschek’s Team Canada entry, and see what we can do with the rest of the options. Call it the Canadian B-Team.

We’ve still got plenty of talent to choose from, and we should be able to put together a decent team. More than decent, actually. In fact, it’s tempting to wonder: With some savvy picks, can we build a roster that’s good enough to give the real Team Canada a run for its money?

No. No, we cannot. That team has Connor McDavid and Sidney Crosby. It has Mitch Marner on the fourth line. It has the reigning Norris winner on the third pairing. They’re good.

But can we build a Canadian B-team that could give some of the other countries in the tournament a run for their money? I think we can. Let’s find out.

Forwards

I admit that I was hoping Eric would get cocky (or maybe just have a senior moment) and leave McDavid off of his list. No such luck. In fact, Canada A snaps up the three leading Canadian-born scorers since the start of the 2017-18 season in McDavid, Nathan MacKinnon and (believe it or not) Brad Marchand.

But somewhat surprisingly, the next three leading scorers are all available, so we’ll happily build our first line around Steven Stamkos, Claude Giroux and Jonathan Huberdeau. That’s a solid start. Stamkos is a decorated veteran of international best-on-best, and we’ll make him team captain. Huberdeau is on his way to his second straight 90-point season and is still in his prime; he might be one of the most underrated offensive stars in the league right now. And Giroux is a talented scorer who gives us some versatility because he can play multiple positions. Plus picking him keeps my chimney dry.

We’ll build our second line around a pair of teammates from Dallas, as Tyler Seguin and Jamie Benn form two-thirds of a decent unit. Neither one is dominating this year, and Benn’s actually been pretty disappointing. But it speaks to the strength of Team Canada that he’s even here, since I can’t imagine too many other countries would be slotting a recent Art Ross winner onto the B-Team’s second line. We’ll make this an all-Central unit by adding Matt Duchene, who suited up for Canada at both the 2016 World Cup and 2014 Olympics.

>> Read the full post at The Athletic

(Want to read this post on The Athletic for free? Sign up for a free seven-day trial.)

Six more active players who’ll make for tricky Hall of Fame debates someday

It’s Hall of Fame Induction weekend, one of my favorite times on the hockey calendar. I love the HHOF, partly because of the history and reverence and celebration of the game’s history. But mostly, because it gives me an excuse to do one of my very favorite things: Argue with strangers about questions that don’t actually have a correct answer.

Hey you, do you feel like arguing? No? Wrong! Of course you do, you dummy. See, it’s fun. We’re having fun right now.

Hall of Fame debates are great fun when they involve the players who are up for induction, or even the ones who are about to be honored. (Guy Carbonneau? Really? OK, as long as we’re sure.) But I’ve never been good at waiting around for an argument to be fully formed, so I also like to occasionally take a swing at some of the active players who’ve been around long enough to establish a career trajectory that may or may not be tracking toward the sport’s ultimate honor.

We did this earlier in the year, when we looked at names like Phil Kessel, Shea Weber and Marc-Andre Fleury. As part of the discussion that followed, plenty of other names were thrown out as equally worthy of consideration. So today, let’s take a look at six more names that are trending toward a tough Hall of Fame call, and where I think they’ll end up.

Brent Burns

Why it’s a tough one: He’s got some pretty decent numbers for a defenseman, although he racked up at least some of them as a forward. He was good in his own end, but probably not great. He was among the very best in the league in his prime, but his prime didn’t kick in until he was almost 30. Also, the beard is either a major plus or a dealbreaker depending on how it looks on any given day.

The case for: Let’s start with the Norris Trophy. Burns has one, from 2017, and the list of players who’ve won the award is almost entirely HHOF guys. And it’s not like he just had one crazy outlier award year – the technical term for that is “a Theodore” – and then went back to being just OK. He’s been a finalist two other times and a postseason all-star three times in all. If your first question for a Hall of Fame candidate is “Were you ever in the conversation for being the best at your position?” Burns is a definite yes.

Beyond that, he’s the leading scorer among defensemen in the cap era, and we all know that offense sells when it comes to the Hall of Fame.

The case against: Those three Norris-caliber seasons all came within a four-year period, so while his peak is high it may not stretch for as long as you’d like. He could extend that this year, and he’s off to a decent start, so we’ll wait and see.

Moreover, he’s an offensive defenseman whose offensive numbers are in the ballpark of the Hall, but only just. If he retired today, a) that would be weird timing, and b) he’d still be 150-200 points behind modern guys like Sergei Zubov, Rob Blake and Scott Niedermayer. That’s fine – he’s got time to bank those points. But he’s not there yet.

Worth remembering: Burns will be remembered as one of the most entertaining characters of his era, which won’t hurt his cause. (It won’t hurt, right? Please tell me we’re not going to hold the occasional smile or joke or naked photoshoot against him.)

Should he get in? I think he’s on track with another Norris-caliber season or two, or with three or four good-but-not-great years to pad his numbers. So at this point, it may be a race against Father Time.

Will he get in? I’d say he needs about 750 points from the blueline to feel like a safe pick, and he’s on pace to get to that mark and maybe even blow by it. But he turns 35 this year, so injury or a major drop in production loom. If I had to bet, I’d say he gets in.

Ilya Kovalchuk

Why it’s a tough one: Because first, based on recent news we may be stretching the definition of “active” here. And more importantly in the big picture, as we’re so often reminded, it’s the Hockey Hall of Fame, not the NHL Hall of Fame. Except that in the era where European players have free access to come over to North America for their pro careers, it’s pretty much been the NHL Hall of Fame.

The case for: He was one of the best offensive wingers in the NHL for over a decade, racking up six straight 40-goal seasons in an era where those were really hard to come by. He won a Richard and had two All-Star nods that came eight years apart and three other years in the top three. So if you’re looking for a guy who was in the “best at his position” conversation, he passes the test. And through 2013, he was easily on pace to hit the major offensive milestones you need for a Hall career.

The case against: Kovalchuk’s departure for the KHL complicates things, because it means his NHL numbers won’t end up where they’d typically need to be. Based on his limited production since his comeback, it’s fair to say that he won’t get to 500 goals or 1,000 points even in the unlikely event he gets another NHL shot. You can take his KHL numbers into account, and you should, because again it’s the Hockey Hall. But how? What’s the conversion rate? It adds a layer of complexity that some voters won’t want to bother wading through for a one-dimensional goal scorer.

Worth remembering: The Hall will have to wrestle with the KHL question with Jaromir Jagr and Pavel Datsyuk before Kovalchuk comes up for a vote. Both of those guys would get in on their NHL years alone, but acknowledging the KHL on Hall of Fame resumes might crack the door ever so slightly for Kovalchuk.

Should he get in? When he left the NHL in 2013, he already had comparable numbers to guys like Pavel Bure and Cam Neely, so you could argue that if he’s blown out his knee instead of just taken a better job somewhere else, he’d be a cinch. I’d be on the fence if I had a vote, but I think I might lean toward yes because I’m more of a high-peak guy than a longevity one.

Will he get in? I don’t think he does. He made his name in a market that doesn’t exist anymore, left the league in a way that made him some enemies and hasn’t done much in a comeback that now seems to be over. Who’s going to stand up in the room on selection day and pound the table for him?

>> Read the full post at The Athletic

(Want to read this post on The Athletic for free? Sign up for a free seven-day trial.)

The 2018 playoff all-disappointment team

We may be one game away from the end of the Stanley Cup Final. As early as Thursday, the Washington Capitals could end 44 years of misery by finally getting their hands on the Stanley Cup, setting off a wild celebration in Washington and fulfilling the lifelong dreams many of these players have had since childhood.

We’d better get our complaining in while we still can.

So today, before we’re all distracted by that icky positivity, let’s break out the annual playoff-bust team. We’re looking for a full roster of post-season disappointment, which seems like a lot until you realize how many big names we’ll have to cut from well-deserved spots. The NHL playoffs are rough.

Keep in mind, we’re looking for players who were disappointing relative to what their teams had hoped they’d do. This isn’t a collection of the worst players from this year’s playoffs, since there are any number of fourth-liners or depth defencemen who did even less. In a way, appearing on a list like this is almost a compliment, since it implies that expectations were high. Remember that when your favourite player shows up and you want to yell at me.

We’ll start with the position that’s usually the easiest to fill in these sorts of things: those poor goalies. Emphasis on “poor.”

GOALTENDERS

Frederik Andersen, Maple Leafs: To his credit, Andersen helped the Leafs dig out of a 3–1 series hole with a pair of strong games. But they were in that hole largely due to a pair of stinkers early on, and with the series on the line he had a disastrous third period in Game 7. Even when the numbers said he was playing well, Andersen seemed to be fighting the puck for long stretches, and it caught up with him when the Leafs could least afford it.

John Gibson, Ducks: Gibson had a phenomenal season, one that had some observers touting him as a Vezina candidate. But he couldn’t maintain that magic in the playoffs, and it was a big part of the reason why the Ducks went out so meekly against the Sharks. His .889 playoff save percentage was the worst of any goaltender who started the majority of his team’s regular-season games. Granted, that number was skewed by a disastrous Game 3 in which he was shelled for five goals in two periods of what would become an 8–1 blowout, but that was a game the Ducks desperately needed.

Pekka Rinne, Predators: Gibson could have been a Vezina finalist; Rinne will almost certainly win it. But once the playoffs arrived he was inconsistent at best for a team that looked like a Stanley Cup favourite. He had his moments, including a pair of shutouts. But he was also pulled four times, including after giving up two soft goals in the deciding seventh game against the Jets.

Late cuts: Sergei Bobrovsky never came up with the sort of game that would have helped the Blue Jackets finish off the Capitals. Matt Murray and Tuukka Rask both won a round, but neither was at his best.

>> Read the full post at Sportsnet

Six trade deadline names that aren't in play (but maybe should be)

The trade deadline is less than two weeks away, and we finally got our first major February deal with Tuesday’s Dion Phaneuf/Marion Gaborik swap. There are still plenty of names of the market, with various reports suggesting that guys like Max Pacioretty, Mike Hoffman, Evander Kane and Mike Green could be available.

But as is usually the case, the really big names aren’t in play. There was a time when it wasn’t unusual to see elite players moved near the deadline, with stars like Ron Francis, Rob Blake and Marian Hossa switching teams. But in recent years, most teams prefer to fall back on the old standby that you can only trade big stars during the off-season — or, more often, not at all.

Sometimes that makes sense. But not always. So today, let’s challenge the conventional wisdom by imagining an alternate universe where NHL teams aggressively reshaped their rosters to put themselves in the best possible position to win — and didn’t just instinctively revert to kicking the can down the road.

What would the landscape look like then? Here are a half-dozen names that reportedly aren’t in play heading towards the 2018 deadline, but maybe should be.

Shea Weber, Canadiens

We’ve been told that the Habs are finally ready to bite the bullet and rebuild, which means shopping veterans like Pacioretty, Tomas Plekanec and Andrew Shaw. There’s even been talk of moving on from Alex Galchenyuk. But two names have been largely absent from the rumour mill: Carey Price and Shea Weber.

Price probably makes sense, since he recently signed a massive extension that starts next season. Whether you like that deal or not, it would be unusual to make that kind of commitment to a player and then trade him before it even has a chance to kick in.

But Weber? On paper, he’d be among a rebuilding team’s best bait. He’s old enough that he’s likely to be a declining asset by the time the team is ready to contend again, but not so old that a contender wouldn’t want him around for the new few seasons. His contract is an issue, but as Montreal fans constantly remind me, maybe not quite as big a problem as you might think given that the actual salary dives in a few years and the Predators would absorb any cap-recapture penalties. And whatever you think of the P.K. Subban trade that brought him to Montreal, there are tons of people in the hockey world who absolutely love Weber’s game, even today.

He’s injured right now, which complicates things (although reports were saying he wasn’t on the block even before he got hurt). Still, he’s expected back before the playoffs. Why not trade him this year, reap a windfall, and give the rebuild a major kickstart?

Potential destination: Edmonton. It’s almost too perfect. The Oilers need blue-line help, Peter Chiarelli needs to pull off a big deal to keep some of the heat off, and Edmonton would be thinking ahead to next year and beyond, so Weber’s current health status wouldn’t be a hurdle. Sure, the cap hit is an issue, but a little retained salary and maybe another injured star going the other way could largely even that out.

>> Read the full post at Sportsnet

Five more blockbusters that apparently almost happened

The 2016 offseason began with a bang, as two of the biggest trades in recent NHL history went down within minutes of each other on June 29. But since then, apart from the occasional move, the trade talk around the league has gone largely quiet.

Or has it? After all, just because blockbuster deals aren’t being made doesn’t mean they’re not being discussed. Hockey history is filled with monster trades that almost happened and that we only find out about after the fact. We covered five of the biggest near-misses a year ago, with names like Steve Yzerman, Corey Perry, Pavel Datsyuk, and even P.K. Subban and Carey Price (in the same deal). Today, let’s look back at a few more.

But first, the obvious disclaimer. While all of these deals were reported by reasonably trustworthy sources, we’ll never know how close they actually came to happening. When it comes to the “near” in near-miss, mileage may vary.

But with that out of the way, let’s get to the fun stuff. Here are five NHL blockbusters that apparently really did almost happen.

Steven Stamkos to the Rangers

Until the one-for-one trades started flying, Stamkos had been the focus of the 2016 off-season. His stay-or-go decision with the Lightning had dragged on all season, and he was reportedly the top target for several teams if he’d made it to free agency. He’s widely considered one of the best players in hockey. So it’s easy to forget that, at one point early on in his career, Stamkos was viewed as a bit of a bust.

The top pick in the 2008 draft, Stamkos arrived in Tampa with plenty of hype. But he got off to a slow start, scoring just twice in his first 21 games. He struggled under Lightning coach Barry Melrose, at one point seeing as little as six minutes of ice time. He just didn’t look ready for NHL action. And within weeks, according to Larry Brooks of the NY Post, the Lightning had decided to trade him.

The deal was struck with Glen Sather and the Rangers, and according to Brooks would have seen the future all-star sent to New York in exchange for “two or three from a wish list that featured Michael Del Zotto, Evgeny Grachev, Ryan Callahan, Brandon Dubinsky and Dan Girardi.”

According to Sather, the deal was done and sealed with a handshake. The problem: That handshake was with Lightning co-owner Len Barrie. When general manager Brian Lawton found out about the discussion, he wanted no part of the deal. Barrie still wanted to go forward, according to the report, but co-owner Oren Koules refused, and the deal died.

Melrose was fired, Stamkos was a 50-goal scorer by his second year in the league, and the rest is history.

>> Read the full post at The Hockey News

With the San Jose Sharks eliminating the St. Louis Blues Wednesday night and the Tampa Bay Lightning and Pittsburgh Penguins headed to a seventh game Thursday, we’re just hours away from having our Stanley Cup Final matchup set. We’ll be down to the best of the best, going head-to-head with the greatest trophy in sports on the line.

And so today, let’s do what any true hockey fan does when confronted with greatness. Let’s ignore it, and pick on the guys who weren’t quite good enough instead.

We’re going to assemble a full lineup of the biggest disappointments from the 2016 playoffs – four centres, eight wingers, six defencemen, two goalies, and even a coach and GM. And we won’t shy away from including some big names. In fact, the bigger the name the better, since high expectations bring more disappointment when they’re not met.

When you look at it that way, finding someone from your favourite team on this list could be considered a compliment, which you should definitely keep in mind before immediately heading into the comments section to call me an idiot. (You still will.)

So here we go, starting up front. (All stats are from hockey-reference.com and war-on-ice-com.)

—

CENTRES

Evgeny Kuznetsov, Washington Capitals

Let's get this out of the way first: No, Alex Ovechkin, the Caps' leading playoff scorer, did not make this team.

True, as Ovechkin's critics love to point out, maybe he didn't elevate his game – by which they presumably mean he should float around three feet over the ice by sheer force of will. But he wasn't a bust, or anything close to it.

Kuznetsov, on the other hand… ouch. After leading the Capitals with 77 points in a breakout regular season, Kuznetsov was limited to just two points in two rounds of the playoffs, which works out to an average of — *tries to do math in head* — not enough.

As with many guys on our list, a lot of that was bad luck – he went from 11.4 per cent on-ice shooting across all situations during the regular season to an almost comically awful 0.9 per cent in the playoffs. That's not a player (and all of his teammates) forgetting how to play, it's random chance striking at the worst possible time. Still, for a team that was desperate to go deep, having their leading scorer go cold at exactly the wrong time stings badly.

Pavel Datsyuk, Detroit Red Wings

Yeah, I know, I don't like this any more than you do.

Heading into what was likely to be his last NHL post-season, Datsyuk had the makings of a feel-good playoff story.

Instead, the 37-year-old was held pointless as the Wings bowed out to the Tampa Bay Lightning in five. We're still not sure if he's heading home, although recent reports sure make it sound that way. If this really is the end, it wasn't the one his magnificent career deserves.

Eric Staal, New York Rangers

When the Rangers acquired Staal at the deadline, everyone cautioned that expectations should be reasonable. This wasn't the 2006 version of Staal, after all. New York was getting a guy on the wrong side of 30 who was having a tough season. And the relatively cheap price they paid reflected that – for once, they didn't even give up a first round pick.

But even given all that, they had to be hoping that a change of scenery and chance to play on a potential Cup contender would give Staal some sort of boost. Instead, they got six points in 20 regular season games and none at all in their first round loss to the Pittsburgh Penguins. The bar was low; Staal sailed well under it.

Claude Giroux, Philadelphia Flyers

Typically, a one-point post-season from one of the league's best offensive players would be enough to earn a spot at the very top of the list. But given the injuries Giroux was battling, we'll bump him down to fourth-line duties. That will keep Flyers fans happy, right?

[Gets pelted with souvenir bracelets.]

Thought so.

>> Read the full post at Sportsnet

Weekend wrap: It's getting ugly for two Western contenders

A look back at the biggest games and emerging story lines of the NHL weekend.

Theme of the Week: Western Blowouts Could Signal Change

Three teams have fired their coaches this season: Ottawa, Edmonton, and last week’s bizarre mess in New Jersey. With a pair of struggling Western teams suffering embarrassing blowout losses over the weekend, that number could be on the verge of rising.

In San Jose, Todd McLellan didn’t sound like a guy with any answers after Saturday’s 7-2 loss to the Blues. The Sharks coach is probably used to this by now, since he’s been on the hot seat for years, and everyone assumes he’ll be fired if the team can’t make a deep playoff run. But right now that may not be an issue, because the team is struggling just to earn a playoff berth, sitting tied with the Flames for the last wild-card spot. All signs point to the Flames falling out of contention, but the suddenly surging Stars are just three points back and probably pose the bigger threat.

And then there’s the team right behind the Stars, the Minnesota Wild. They took a 7-1 beating from Dallas on Saturday in a game in which Wild goalie Darcy Kuemper was pulled yet again. That’s a tough loss for a team that seemed to be rounding back into shape following a five-game December losing streak, and it left the Wild five back of a playoff spot with three teams to pass. That’s just not good enough for an organization that’s spent heavily in hopes of building a Stanley Cup contender, and at some point somebody will likely have to take the fall.

That could end up being coach Mike Yeo, even though it’s hard to put too much blame on him. The Wild are one of the league’s better possession teams, but they’ve been let down by their goaltending. Niklas Backstrom has struggled, and Kuemper’s play has plummeted after a hot start. That’s hardly Yeo’s fault, although coaches’ reputations tend to live and die with the goaltenders. It’s also worth remembering that Yeo was very much on the hot seat this time last year before eventually guiding the team to a playoff spot and a first-round upset of the top-seeded Avalanche. But the Wild are one more bad stretch away from being eliminated from playoff contention, so fair or not, Yeo will be under a microscope for the rest of the year.

If there’s one piece of good news for the Sharks and Wild, it’s that at least one of them will be getting back into the win column soon. The two teams face each other tomorrow night in Minnesota.

Cup Watch: The League’s Five Best

The five teams that seem most likely to earn the league’s top prize: the Stanley Cup.

5. St. Louis Blues (23-13-3, plus-19 goals differential): After spanking San Jose, they look well-positioned to bank some points this week. Their next four games are against the Coyotes, Sharks again, Hurricanes, and Oilers.

4. Pittsburgh Penguins (24-10-5, plus-24): At this point, I still like them just a bit better than the Islanders, even though New York has temporarily snuck back into a tie for first place in the Metro.

>> Read the full post on Grantland

The top secret agenda for Team Canada's Olympic orientation camp

The big news in the hockey world this week was Team Canada's official orientation camp, which is being held in Calgary. The event marked the first opportunity for the country's Olympic hopefuls to gather, and gave coach Mike Babcock and GM Steve Yzerman their first chance to begin the evaluation process.

But there was a snag – due to insurance issues, the players couldn't actually suit up and take to the ice. Which led many fans to wonder: What exactly are they doing out there?

Luckily, my spies were there, and they were able to snag a copy of one day's official agenda.

Read the rest of this post...

Hidden playoff injuries revealed

Jordan Staal is informed of the trade
rumors linking him to the Maple Leafs.

It’s the time of year when hockey fans see something they’re not used to on NHL injury reports: honesty.

By now fans have become used to teams being as vague as possible when it comes to health issues. Many injuries to key players are never acknowledged at all, and those that are mentioned are cryptically referred to as upper or lower body injuries and nothing more.

But that all changes one a team has been eliminated. There’s no point in keeping up the charade once the season is over, so teams finally let the public know what sort of medical challenges the players were dealing with. Sometimes the news confirms fans’ existing suspicions, and sometimes we’re all caught completely off-guard.

Here are some of the hidden injuries that teams have recently revealed after being eliminated from Stanley Cup contention.

Ryan Suter, Nashville Predators – His teammates say he was obviously dealing with some sort of major injury that will require him to meet with a specialist in Detroit, since he spent the past few months constantly whispering into his cellphone about some sort of appointment there at 12:01 on July 1.

David Backes, St. Louis Blues – Along with several teammates, suffered abdominal injuries from laughing at that moronic advance scout who kept insisting that the best way to score on Jonathan Quick was to take slapshots from centre ice.

Ed Jovanovski, Florida Panthers – Keeps saying that he thinks this year’s first round loss will help the Panthers when they’re back in the playoffs next year, which has led to facial trauma from all the people who keep pinching his cheeks and telling him he’s being just adorable.

Ryan Kesler, Vancouver Canucks – Will be out for six months after surgery to repair an injured labrum that has confounded local experts, in the sense that they haven’t been able to figure out how to blame it on Roberto Luongo.

Read the rest of this post...