Latest news with #SeanMcIndoe
New York Times
18 hours ago
- Business
- New York Times
NBA and NHL title guides and predictions, Pulse-style
The Pulse Newsletter 📣 | This is The Athletic's daily sports newsletter. Sign up here to receive The Pulse directly in your inbox. Good morning! Carry your own bag today. Tonight, a high-stakes stretch begins on our televisions. The puck drops in Game 1 of the Stanley Cup Final at 8 p.m. ET, and we embark on what could be a three-week run of alternating title-series games between the NBA (which starts tomorrow) and NHL. From the surface, these look like interminably different series: on one side, a rematch of last year's championship series; on the other, two franchises who have never won a title. Hm. Dive deeper and you'll find similarities, though. Advertisement To put it into proper context, I convened a Slack roundtable with Red Light author Sean McIndoe and Bounce wizard Zach Harper, two of the best minds you'll find on hockey and basketball, respectively. The funniest, too, for my money. The predictions come last, because I want you to stay with me as long as possible: 1. What's the most interesting thing to you about the other sport's title series? Sean: Imitation is the sincerest form of flattery, so I think it's cool how you guys have copied the NHL's longstanding 'the best player in the final is a Canadian' gimmick. Zach: They move around on knives! How does this not freak people out?! I also find it fascinating that we haven't had a Canadian team win a Stanley Cup title in over 30 years, and a team from Florida could block the Oilers two years in a row. 2. There is anxiety over the marketability of both series. What are you most wary about? Sean: The concern these days in the NHL isn't that smaller-market teams are having success. The problem is whether those smaller markets now have an advantage over the bigger ones, due to financial factors and player preferences, among other things. There's debate over whether this is actually a real problem at all. But as a league, and a business, you don't want the markets that are driving your revenue to feel like they're falling behind. That narrative, accurate or not, will only get stronger with another Florida win. Zach: I think I'm most wary about this being a short series. The basketball should be really good. But you can have good basketball in all of the games and it ends up being a sweep. Just ask last year's Pacers, who played the Celtics extremely well in the conference finals but ended up getting swept. This is a great basketball matchup, but the Thunder might make quick work of it. Advertisement Let's take a quick news break before getting back to it: The Knicks' splashy risk In news I'm still having a hard time processing, the Knicks fired coach Tom Thibodeau yesterday, just days after the franchise's best season in 25 years. Thibodeau had $20 million left on his contract and the backing of franchise cornerstone Jalen Brunson. In a statement, Knicks president Leon Rose called it a 'difficult decision.' James L. Edwards III thinks the franchise may find out the grass isn't always greener, and I tend to agree. Wait, that Hilary Knight? In the newish PWHL, teams can place players on an expansion protection list, meaning new franchises can only draft certain players from existing teams. The full list was released yesterday, and Boston superstar Hilary Knight was not on it. It was a complete shock, and our resident PWHL expert Hailey Salvian described Knight — for those unfamiliar — as a Steph Curry/Sidney Crosby/Diana Taurasi-level player who, even at nearly 36, is playing great hockey. Her next stop will inevitably be in Seattle or Vancouver. More news 📫 Love The Pulse? Check out our other newsletters. Back to Sean and Zach: 3. Concerns aside, there are superstars here aplenty. Outside of the obvious names, who's the most interesting player a general fan should know before puck drop/tip off? Sean: Let me go off the board here with my pick: Sasha Barkov, the Panthers center who may be the best two-way player in the league. On a team full of rats (and proud of it), he just quietly goes about his business, dominating at both ends of the rink. He's kind of the Phil Hartman of the Panthers, the glue guy who makes it all work even if he isn't the one getting most of the headlines. Zach: Chet Holmgren and Pascal Siakam! Holmgren moves around like his shoulders are held up by a wire coat hanger. Chet can do it all on the court and he's 7-foot-1. Like watching a Tim Burton drawing audition for a new 'Space Jam' movie. And despite Siakam giving himself the horrible 'Spicy P' nickname, he's been a tremendous weapon. He's scoring in four seconds after opponent baskets and he's been the Pacers' leading scorer. Advertisement 4. In 25 words or fewer, give us one wild yet realistic prediction for your series. Sean: The Edmonton Oilers become the greatest Canadian Stanley Cup winners of the last 32 years. Zach: The Pacers will win Game 1 and Haliburton will have his teammates mock the Thunder by doing the sideline interview together. Thank you to Sean and Zach for that lively conversation. Almost done: 📺 NHL: Panthers at Oilers 8 p.m. ET on TNT/Max Here we go. Florida is the favorite to repeat. Edmonton has more star power and home-ice advantage. Read our full preview here. The atmosphere, even through the TV, should be electric. Can't wait. We'll also have video highlights from this game tomorrow in The Athletic app. Finally, need to pick someone to root for? We have you covered on that, too. 📺 WCWS: Texas Tech vs. Texas 8 p.m. ET on ESPN It still boggles my mind how much softball pitchers play, as NiJaree Canady has thrown every pitch for the Red Raiders in this WCWS. Let's see how the Longhorns fare against her. If you're not into hockey, this is your easy switchable option. Get tickets to games like these here. I just want to remind you that soccer transfer rumors will be flying at breakneck speed in the coming weeks. Our DealSheet is an essential bookmark. Get the lowdown on, well, everyone here. Andrew Marchand has a striking column on ESPN's bizarre NBA announcer saga, which began with laying off Jeff Van Gundy and Mark Jackson and ending up with a mismatched mess. It could all change next year. The MLB trade deadline is lurking, and Jim Bowden has a list of possible sellers. Also, don't miss this week's Power Rankings. Jim Ayello has a fiery fantasy football take for your offseason: Saquon Barkley should not be a first-round pick. 🎥 'No Dunks' also did an NBA Finals preview in the way only they can. Watch it here. Advertisement Most-clicked in the newsletter yesterday: Our list of NCAA super regional matchups. Games start Friday. Most-read on the website yesterday: The newser on Thibs' firing. Ticketing links in this article are provided by partners of The Athletic. Restrictions may apply. The Athletic maintains full editorial independence. Partners have no control over or input into the reporting or editing process and do not review stories before publication.
New York Times
08-05-2025
- Sport
- New York Times
One-way offside? Free range faceoffs? NHL Rules Court is back in session
By Sean McIndoe, Sean Gentille and Shayna Goldman Welcome to Rules Court, the feature in which you send in your proposals for NHL rule changes and three of us vote on them. Convince at least two of us, and your rule is passed. This is, by my count, the ninth edition of this feature. Over the years, we've changed everything from the salary cap to replay review to the playoff format, in some cases multiple times. We've also made it so that coaches have to walk across the ice to serve bench minors. We're really doing the Lord's work, is what I'm trying to say. Advertisement Today we're back with seven new suggestions sent in by readers. They'll be reviewed by Sean, Other Sean and Shayna (aka Almost Sean). Will any get the required YES votes to be passed into the NHL rulebook? Let's find out… Note: Submitted questions have been edited for clarity and style. Once a team pulls its goalie from the ice for a sixth attacker, all icing should be waived off. This would allow the defense to take unlimited shots at the open net without icing being called. Additionally, you'd get some fierce skating races to try and get possession of the puck after it was shot at the open net. — A.J. F. McIndoe: I don't love it. Yes, you'd get unlimited shots at the empty net. But you'd also make things far easier on the defending team, and eliminate a bunch of the dramatic offensive-zone faceoffs. Empty-net goals are fun, but tying goals are way more fun, and this change would mean fewer of those. Put me down for a NO. (Bonus side rant: More rink-wide shots would just mean more TV directors doing that awful 'switch to the camera inside the net' thing that they still think is fascinating even though all it does is break the visual flow of a key moment. Stop doing this!) Gentille: Defending players having to decide whether to go for the empty net or risk the icing is one of my favorite parts of six-on-five play. Also, I like tying goals, and this one would guarantee some kind of catastrophic injury in those puck races. NO. Goldman: Yep, Sean 2's take here drives home the argument against this — the risk versus reward of shooting the puck down the ice is an exciting element of six-on-five play and helps show different coaching tactics. Plus, it takes away the one advantage a short-handed team has in those empty-net situations. NO. If you have pulled your goalie and are at six-on-five, if you ice the puck, you cannot put your goalie back in. You'll see a lot more teams being careful breaking the puck out six-on-five to avoid a defensive-zone faceoff without a goalie. As far as I'm concerned, being able to put your goalie back in is a line change and shouldn't be allowed. — Brad K. McIndoe: Brad, I can assure you that you're not alone here. This one comes up a lot. It really seems to bother a lot of hockey fans that the 'no subs on an icing' rule doesn't apply to a pulled goalie. But do we really want to see teams winning faceoffs and immediately scoring into empty nets? Like the first suggestion, this just seems like a way to tilt the ice in favor of the team that's leading and make life harder for the team trying to come back. Just in terms of entertainment value, that feels like we're getting it backward. Advertisement I'll admit I toyed with a yes here, if only because it would be interesting to see teams put a defenseman in the crease as a de facto goalie for faceoffs (which is what would happen). But it feels like the novelty there would wear off after the first few times, so this is another NO. Gentille: Why is everyone trying to end these games earlier? Did McIndoe micro-target fan bases whose teams recently gave up back-breaking six-on-five goals? Goalie pulls are one of the most exciting sequences we've got. They must be valued and protected. NO. Goldman: Sean Squared make very good points here. It feels like too drastic a punishment for icing the puck, which would lead to empty-net goals way more often. Don't we want to see more goalie pulls and potential comebacks? The rules are different for goalies for good reason — they shouldn't have to try and dramatically dive over the boards and race into the net right after the faceoff after playing 50-plus minutes each night. NO. My wife suggested this and I wholeheartedly agree. If you get a penalty near the end of the period, you have to stay in the box the entire intermission. — Daniel L. McIndoe: Who could be against this? The player in the box doesn't have to get yelled at by his coach. He gets some alone time to really think about what he's done. Fans could spend their intermission lining up to take pictures with him, like he's a panda bear at the zoo. As long as the guy doesn't have to pee really badly, I see no downside. YES. Gentille: It's not pee I'm worried about. NO. Goldman: I feel like the punishment doesn't match the crime for a minor penalty. Maybe there's a way to do this only for majors and 10-minute misconducts (just kidding, kind of). NO. I honestly believe this is the only good idea I have ever had, so hear me out: One-way offside. This rule change would mean that offside doesn't apply when entering the offensive zone. Players on the offensive team are allowed to cross the blue line before the puck, but once the puck crosses the blue line, regular offside rules apply. So if the puck leaves the zone, the players all have to tag up at the blue line as usual and the puck can't go back in the zone until the last player clears. After that, the players are free to enter the zone before the puck again. This rule would open up the game and stop teams from being able to play the dreaded 'trap' while also preventing the offensive team from being able to leave the zone to regroup. And the absolute best part? Reduces the offside challenges. — Buddy B. McIndoe: It wouldn't be a Rules Court without somebody trying to blow up the offside rule. I like this one better than the generic 'get rid of offside entirely' approach, since the hold-the-line battles to keep the puck in are good. With this rule, we're keeping those while still opening up the game and (crucially) getting rid of those stupid, awful, terrible freeze-frame offside reviews that all good and decent people hate. Sure, I'm in. YES. Gentille: This feels chaotic and impossible to officiate, which makes my ultimate stance very sad. NO. Goldman: It's a little convoluted for me and gets away from where the focus on offside challenges should be. Let's just put a time limit on when the entry is no longer eligible to be challenged, because it's fixing something else that isn't broken. NO. First, I want to say that NHL Rules Court is the best damn column on The Athletic and I look forward to it all year long. Thanks for making it. This will surely be too hokey for most, but I've always thought there has to be some way to make the Presidents' Trophy matter. The team that wins the 82-game bloodbath that is the NHL season gets no respect. My proposal, the winner of the Presidents' Trophy gets an 'extra life' in the playoffs. Meaning, for one time only in the playoffs, if the team that finished first overall in the regular season loses a Game 7, they are given a rubber match Game 8, also played at home. Shouldn't the league's best team be rewarded with something tangible? Hockey players have it driven into them from birth nothing matters but the Stanley Cup. This would increase the race for first overall right to the end of the season, instead of superstars being healthy-scratched for fans who are paying $150 a ticket. And, how rad would a GAME 8 be? I see no downside, but that's me. — Dave D. McIndoe: I am absolutely on board with the overall concept here. The NHL doesn't do enough to make regular-season success feel important, especially in the parity era, in which playing a 95-point wild-card team is nowhere near the easy matchup division winners used to get in the 21-team days. Unfortunately for Dave, his timing here stinks. Through no fault of his own, he sent his question in just before we got one of the all-time Game 7 classics between the Presidents' Trophy-winning Winnipeg Jets and the wild-card St. Louis Blues. Having watched that game, I'm trying to imagine what it would have been like if we'd known the Jets got a do-over if they lost. I can't do it. I try very hard not to have too many untouchables in my hockey-fan-head canon, but the sanctity of Game 7 is one of them. NO. Gentille: What's more tangible than a snazzy new banner? I like parts of this conceptually — adding juice to regular-season games is a good thing, and why we should have a 6-10 play-in tournament. Ultimately, though, I can't get past the idea of punishing a wild-card team for beating the Presidents' Trophy winner in a Game 7. NO. Goldman: Game 7s are the one thing in hockey that is NOT broken, so we cannot have a Game 8. Sean 1 is right, there should be a way to better reward regular-season success, but this just isn't it. The eighth seed potentially upsetting the first-place team adds too much pressure to a series; just think about when the 2023 Florida Panthers came back from a 3-1 deficit to take out the 135-point Boston Bruins. That's part of the magic of the Stanley Cup playoffs: anything can happen. NO. In basketball, players can stand anywhere they please on a jump ball. But in hockey, everyone lines up on the defensive side of the puck. Faceoffs are always a contest to pull the puck backward. My proposal is to allow players to line up for a faceoff anywhere on the ice they choose, as long as they're not in an offside position when the puck is dropped. Changes the faceoff strategy completely. — Mark P. McIndoe: This sounds cool at first, until you realize that it would work both ways: Offensive players could move forward, but the defending team could also put guys on the point. I think the pull-back faceoff works precisely because the other team isn't there to disrupt it. You might be able to talk me into allowing this change for center-ice faceoffs, but I like the offensive zone draws the way they are. NO. Gentille: Y'know what, I like the idea of adding this wrinkle. Defending teams could also send guys to the point, but there'd be a tactical element to the whole deal. Also, more generally, I can't think of a great reason to pass on this one other than 'that's just how faceoffs work,' and I don't love that justification. YES. Goldman: Maybe I have been saying no way too often today, and this rule change hit me at the right time. I'm intrigued by this because I love the idea of coaches having to tweak traditional faceoff strategies and get creative. Test it in the AHL or something first, then bring it to the big leagues. YES. If the ninth-place team in one conference (random example, the Calgary Flames) finishes with more points than the eighth-place team in the other conference (random example, the Montreal Canadiens), then the two teams play a one-game play-in, hosted by the challenged team. So in this example, Montreal would host Calgary in a one-game playoff, with the winner facing Washington in the first round. You could also put a points threshold on it if you wish (e.g. Calgary needs to finish three-plus points better than Montreal for the crossover game to be initiated). — Matt B. McIndoe: So, extra playoffs? An occasional bonus Game 7 to start the postseason? Gosh, twist my arm. YES. Gentille: Ah yes, love a random example. Let's put this one on the books until we get a full-on NBA-style play-in. Don't let the good be the enemy of the great, as I say when I file a story that I don't particularly like. YES. Goldman: I'm not big on the idea of a full-blown play-in tournament, but am on board with some sort of wild-card series for the No. 8 seed to truly earn its way into the final 16. This is a fun way to do it, and I even like the idea of a potential East-East or West-West Stanley Cup Final if that team can somehow defy all the odds of going through the wrong conference. YES. So after hearing seven cases, here are the new rules we wound up with: • Players can now line up wherever they want for a faceoff (as long as they're still onside), instead of just on their own side of the puck. • There will now be a single-game play-in for the last playoff spot if the ninth-place team in one conference has a better record than the eighth-place team in the other. Advertisement That's it. Just 2-for-7 this time around, which is not our best work. Although given how we started, I was legitimately worried we were heading for our first ever shutout, so maybe we just take the two YES nods and get out of here. As always, if you have a suggestion you'd like to see us debate in Rules Court, you can send it to us through this email address. (Top photo of Nathan MacKinnon and Roope Hintz: Matthew Stockman / Getty Images)
New York Times
06-05-2025
- Sport
- New York Times
Greatest revenge games in sports, from Mikko Rantanen's Game 7 to Brett Favre to Luka Dončić
By Sean McIndoe, Mike Jones, Tyler Kepner and Christian Clark We love a good revenge game, don't we folks? It's an irresistible sports trope. A player leaves a team under murky circumstances — maybe against their will or maybe there's a footprint on their back as they head out the door — then, inevitably, they get to face their former team, and they teach them a lesson. And the lesson is: You done messed up. It doesn't always work, but when it does, it's glorious. And if it comes with frequent shots of an owner or general manager looking miserable, even better. We saw a classic example over the weekend in the NHL, with the Dallas Stars' Mikko Rantanen breaking the hearts of his former team, the Colorado Avalanche, in Game 7 of their playoff series. It wasn't his first game against the Avs — he'd faced them once in the regular season back in March — but it was easily the most important meeting and the biggest opportunity for revenge. And let's just say he delivered. Inspired by Rantanen's performance, we assembled writers from a handful of sports, asking them to share the greatest revenge game they can remember. The list is subjective and not meant to be comprehensive. Have your own favorite? Feel free to share the memories in the comments section. Mikko Rantanen's Game 7 versus the Avalanche Call it taking the easy answer, or accuse me of recency bias, but I don't see how the NHL's answer for 'greatest revenge game in the sport' can be anything but Rantanen absolutely decimating the Avalanche late in Saturday's Game 7. Let's look at the scenario that just played out. Rantanen doesn't want to leave Colorado and is reportedly willing to take less than market value to re-sign. He thinks he is close on a new contract. Then the team shocks him with a trade to the Carolina Hurricanes, where he is unproductive and miserable, at which point he is flipped again to the Stars. Dallas then faces his former team in the best matchup of the first round, but with 15 minutes left in regulation, it looks like the story is going to end with a whimper. Colorado is up 2-0, about to steal Game 7 in Dallas and move on. That's when Rantanen puts together quite possibly the greatest period in NHL postseason history, scoring three times and adding an assist as Dallas completes the comeback and wins 4-2. Rantanen ends up leading the series in scoring. He has two four-point periods, something only Mario Lemieux had ever done twice in the playoffs in a career, except Rantanen did it twice in 48 hours. Oh, and he seems to have plunged his former team into a full-fledged existential crisis of doubt and loathing. I mean, short of flying to Colorado and burning the arena to the ground, then going door to door to punch all their fans in the groin, I'm not sure what else he could have done to drive the point home. I'm going out on a limb, but I feel like the Avalanche might want a do-over here. — Sean McIndoe Brett Favre's first game against the Packers When it comes to revenge games, the NFL has certainly seen its fair share. But none proved more poetic than quarterback Brett Favre's first game against the Green Bay Packers after 16 legendary seasons as the face of the team. After one season with the New York Jets, Favre signed with the Packers' NFC North rivals, the Minnesota Vikings, in 2009. In Week 4 of the regular season, Favre and the Vikings welcomed the Packers and former Favre understudy Aaron Rodgers to Minneapolis, and No. 4 showed he still had something left in the tank, completing 24 of 31 passes for 271 yards and three touchdowns in a 30-23 victory. For good measure, Favre also bested the Packers in his return to Green Bay in Week 8, throwing four touchdown passes and for 244 yards in a 38-26 win. Favre wasn't the only quarterback to exact revenge against his former team. In 1994, Joe Montana made the 49ers pay for turning to Steve Young as their starter. The spurned Montana signed with the Kansas City Chiefs and in his only game against San Francisco passed for 203 yards and two touchdowns in a 24-17 victory. And who could forget Tom Brady's return to New England in 2021 as a member of the Tampa Bay Buccaneers? A year earlier, Patriots coach Bill Belichick had concluded Brady's Super Bowl-winning days were behind him and let him leave in free agency. Brady signed with the Bucs and promptly led Tampa Bay that season to a Super Bowl LV win over the Kansas City Chiefs. Then, in Week 4 of the 2021 regular season, Brady made his return to Foxboro and directed the Bucs to a 19-17 victory to complete the revenge circle. — Mike Jones Roger Clemens sticking it to the Red Sox How dominant was Roger Clemens for the Boston Red Sox? When the team let him go after the 1996 season, Clemens was tied for the franchise's career wins record — with Cy Young himself. The Toronto Blue Jays landed the Rocket with the richest pitching contract in baseball history — more than $8 million per season — and Dan Duquette, then the Red Sox GM, wished him well in the 'twilight of his career.' The comment was cutting but reasonable. In his last four seasons with Boston, Clemens made no All-Star teams, collected no votes for the Cy Young Award and went 40-39. With Toronto, though, Clemens embarked on a personal crusade to make the Red Sox regret their indifference. He returned to Fenway Park on July 12, 1997, with a revenge statement for the ages: eight innings, one run, no walks — and 16 strikeouts, then a record for a Blue Jays pitcher, in a 3-1 Blue Jays victory. 'He came to make a point,' Boston slugger Mo Vaughn said later, 'and he did.' Fans who had jeered Clemens before the game rose in appreciation after he fanned Vaughn to end the eighth. As he strutted off the mound toward the visitors dugout, Clemens glared at the Red Sox executive suite. His twilight would burn bright, with more Cy Young Awards after leaving Boston (four) than he had won with the Red Sox (three). Clemens' late-career surge would later be tainted by ties to steroids. But with the Yankees in 2003, as he reflected on his career while approaching his 300th victory, Clemens still relished the moment he stuck it to Duquette and the Red Sox: 'I didn't need motivation. One guy made a decision. He made a wrong decision. He critiqued the wrong guy.' — Tyler Kepner Luka Dončić's return to Dallas In Luka Dončić's return to Dallas, tears flowed, and so did the stepback 3s. On April 9, the Slovenian superstar got to play at American Airlines Center for the first time since the Dallas Mavericks surprisingly traded him to the Los Angeles Lakers more than two months earlier. The Mavericks welcomed Dončić back with a tribute video that stirred up so much emotion, Dončić's eyes welled with tears as he sat on the Lakers' bench and watched it. When the ball finally tipped, Dončić showed a side of himself that Mavericks fans knew well: the ruthless competitor. He scored 14 points in the first quarter, and he had 31 points by halftime. Every time Dončić touched the ball, Mavericks fans cheered him. And almost every time a Mavericks player shot free throws, those same fans chanted 'Fire Nico!' Their ire was, of course, directed at Mavericks general manager Nico Harrison, who initiated the Dončić trade talks with the Lakers and was watching his former star player's return from a tunnel near midcourt. Dončić finished with 45 points, eight rebounds and six assists. Anthony Davis, the centerpiece of the package Dallas got back for Dončić, underwhelmed with 13 points. The Lakers beat the Mavericks 112-97, and Dončić declared afterward that he was ready to turn the page on the trade that had upended his life. 'I love the fans,' Dončić said. 'I love this city. But it's time to move on.' — Christian Clark (Photo: Richard Rodriguez / Getty Images)
New York Times
18-04-2025
- Sport
- New York Times
Leafs, Senators, history and pressure: What success means in the Battle of Ontario
The most anticipated matchup in the NHL Eastern Conference playoffs is undoubtedly the Battle of Ontario between the Toronto Maple Leafs and the Ottawa Senators, as these provincial rivals are set to clash once again after 21 years. Toronto has won all four previous playoff meetings, but Ottawa dominated the regular season series, sweeping the Leafs 3-0. The Senators are making their first postseason appearance since 2017, and while they swept aside the Maple Leafs in the regular season, Toronto enters the series as Atlantic Division champions. Advertisement On the latest episode of The Athletic Hockey Show, Sean McIndoe, Sean Gentille, and Frankie Corrado discussed if Ottawa's season will still be considered a success even if it ends in a first-round exit, and why all the pressure is on Toronto heading into this series. A partial transcript has been edited for clarity and length. The full episode is available on the 'The Athletic Hockey Show' feed on Apple Podcasts and Spotify. Sean McIndoe: I don't want to undersell how important this series is in Ottawa. A lot of Senators fans still have the scars of those four playoff losses, and to climb all this way and then lose to the Leafs again would be very painful. But purely from just a hockey point of view, the Senators have already achieved the goal for this year. The Senators are already a success, and pending whatever happens, they don't need to win the series here. The Toronto Maple Leafs have not accomplished anything because there was nothing they could do short of a playoff run. Sean Gentille: What if it's Leafs in five? What if this is a short series? Are we still saying this is a success for the Senators? Sean McIndoe: It'll sting for Ottawa, absolutely. But you will still look at the season as a success, and say, 'Man, I wish we had lost to anybody but the Leafs in the first round.' But as far as the pressure in this series, I don't think there's any question it's on the Leafs, and they will feel that. I'm sure the Senators players will remind them of it at every opportunity. Mentally, this could be a hurdle for the Leafs. If you're the Leafs, you will look back on last year in the playoffs, even though you probably don't want to. But like Frankie said, they just can't score in the playoffs, and this always happens to them. They had one game against the Bruins where they managed three goals in a game, but only one. They were looking at each other, going, 'Hey, who's the goalie in that game?' All right, that was the one game that the Bruins started Linus Ullmark. We couldn't score on Jeremy Swayman, but we did pretty well against Ullmark. So maybe that's where you feel okay … right up until he makes 15 saves in the first period in Game 1 then you're down 1-0 in intermission, and you're looking around going, 'It's all happening again, here we go.' Advertisement Frankie Corrado: There's no doubt that the pressure is all on Toronto. Based on the playoff past, the scar tissue that has followed them, and only having one series win in nine years. Also, Toronto's got fan pressure, or whatever you want to call it. They're playing home games in Toronto, and they have a massive contingent out in Ottawa. So a little bit of that follows them around. I'm not saying that's going to be a deterrent or anything like that. But the pressure will be felt on home ice and on the road somewhat equally. But it does feel a little bit different for Toronto this year, they're operating differently. They've achieved the same result by being a good team and going to the playoffs. They even call it a better result because they've won a division now, and they're operating a little differently in how they do things. But this is when we wanted to see if that's going to work. The Craig Berube evaluation, or whatever you want to call it, starts now for Berube and this team. We knew this was almost a formality that they were going to get to the playoffs. But now, does it look different? And the crazy thing is, it's two weeks. You make this entire evaluation, you play all these games, and you make this evaluation over a quick two-week stretch where things can happen quickly. But that's reality for this group based on what has happened in the past. Sean Gentille: And the first division title in 25 years too … Frankie Corrado: The first one that counts … Sean Gentille: Does that carry any weight? I'm asking you guys specifically because it seems like a complete afterthought. Sean McIndoe: They could have won the Presidents' Trophy, and it would not matter. You can't win a playoff series during the regular season. It's not like, 'Wow, they haven't done enough.' It's that there was nothing they could do. They could go 82-0, we all made that joke heading into the season. The Leafs could go 82-0, but it wouldn't have mattered. They have to do it in the playoffs, and now the playoffs are here. Advertisement To pull it back to the original Battle of Ontario, that was always the thing hanging over the Senators back then. Remember those Senators teams were really good under Jacques Martin, but they just couldn't get over the hump. Back then, the hump wasn't necessarily the first round because they did win a couple of rounds. But they couldn't get past the Leafs. And they ended up making the coaching change, the lockout happened, and they got to a final. But they never got past the finish line. Now it's flipped around, and the pressure is all on one team in a series that's going to have a ton of media coverage, national attention and spotlight. Frankie Corrado: And social media. We never had social media for the original Battles of Ontario in the early 2000s. We had newspapers and what you saw on the broadcast, and during intermissions. So from the fan experience, this is going to be totally different this time around. Sean McIndoe: Everybody just stay frosty is what I'm saying to Leafs and Senators fans. I'm going to say the same thing to you I said to Brady Tkachuk … 10 out of 10, not 15 out of 10. That's all I'm asking. Sean Gentille: Meanwhile, I'm stuck being compelled by this series. I wish I wasn't, but I blame you guys, my profession and various aspects of my personal life for this. I am way too invested in this one. You can listen to full episodes of The Athletic Hockey Show for free on Apple Podcasts and Spotify. (Top Photo:)
