Capitals accept differences of opinion on White House visit

By Stephen Whyno (AP Hockey Writer)

WASHINGTON (AP) — The news is constantly on television at the Washington Capitals’ practice facility, and like any workplace, there’s no shortage of opinions.

”We’re human beings, and people share different opinions and different political views,” veteran team leader Brooks Orpik said. ”It’s no different than anybody else. People that are friends vote for different people.”

Those differences were on public display the last week when two players said they would not join their teammates in visiting President Donald Trump at the White House on Monday to celebrate their Stanley Cup championship. Canadians Braden Holtby and Brett Connolly said they’d respectfully decline the invitation.

Several other players, including Russian captain Alex Ovechkin, Americans T.J. Oshie and John Carlson and American coach Todd Reirden have said they’re going. A vast majority of the team that won the first NHL title in franchise history is expected to tour of the White House and meet Trump in the Oval Office in a private ceremony.

The Capitals are accepting of each other’s differences of opinion on going to the White House and say this isn’t a divisive issue and won’t be a distraction.

”You’re a team and you want to stick together no matter what,” Holtby said. ”For me, it’s just a personal thing. I believe in what I believe in, and in order to stick to those values, I think I have to do what I feel is right, but that doesn’t make a difference on everyone else’s decision. We stick by every single teammate we have and their decision.”

Playoff hero Devante Smith-Pelly, who is black, told Canada’s Postmedia in June he would not go to the White House, citing Trump’s rhetoric. Smith-Pelly has been with the minor league Hershey Bears since late February.

Without specifically naming Smith-Pelly, Connolly said he’s ”in full support of an old teammate that I am really good friends with and I agreed with.” Beyond Holtby and Connolly, it is not clear how many players or team officials will not go to the White House.

Owner Ted Leonsis has said he’ll go if the team chose to. A spokeswoman said Wednesday that Leonsis did not have any comment about the Capitals’ decision to go.

Reirden, who was Barry Trotz’s top assistant when Washington won last season and has succeeded him as coach, said he has thought about visiting the White House while driving by it on Constitution Avenue, the same road the Capitals paraded down with hockey’s historic trophy.

”I was really excited about the invitation and will be going and be happy to be going,” Reirden said. ”I understand our players and their decisions, and I respect it. They’re allowed to make their own decisions. It’s important that we support them in whatever decision that they make.”

Holtby and his wife, Brandi, have marched in Washington’s pride parade and are advocates for LGBTQ rights. Holtby said that was a factor in his decision and that he and his family ”believe in a world where humans are treated with respect regardless of your stature.”

The Trump administration has taken steps to roll back protections for LGBTQ individuals, including rescinding guidance for schools on how to treat transgender students and attempting to bar transgender individuals from serving in the military.

”Sometimes you’re forced into situations where you have to stick by what you believe,” Holtby said. ”But in the end, I think there’s more important things I can do in the future. Trying to make a stand this way, I don’t think it does the most in terms of creating change. In the future, I just want to stick by what I believe in and trying to push towards a world where people are created equal.”

Orpik said the White House visit is not a point of contention among the defending champions like some on the outside are trying to make it. He’s quick to point out that even players who are going can agree with Holtby, but still want to experience one last Stanley Cup celebration.

”There’s a lot of guys that share a lot of the same values that Holts does, but they’re going to the White House and it’s not an endorsement of whoever’s in the office,” Orpik said. ”Whether you go to the White House to celebrate a championship, I don’t think says anything about your values or your character.”

In 2012, playoff MVP Tim Thomas decided not to join his Cup champion Boston Bruins teammates in seeing then-President Barack Obama at the White House, citing the ”out of control” growth of the federal government. Team president Cam Neely released a statement saying, ”We are disappointed that Tim chose not to join us, and his views certainly do not reflect those of the Jacobs family or the Bruins organization.”

The Bruins lost to the Capitals in the first round of the playoffs in 2012, which was Thomas’ last season with Boston because he was traded to Florida.

Thomas’ individual protest predated by many years the NBA’s Golden State Warriors’ team decision not to see Trump. Holtby said that as soon as the first championship team decided not to keep up the tradition of being honored by the sitting president at the White House, it became a topic for other professional athletes and he’s not surprised this has become such a hot-button issue.

Capitals players have been unflinchingly supportive of each other’s decisions in recent days and insist the White House is not a controversial topic internally.

”Guys are mature about it,” said Tom Wilson, who is Canadian. ”It’s like when we’re not playing well, guys aren’t yelling at each other and getting upset with each other. That’s something about our group that’s helped us with our success. We’re mature, and we deal with it as adults. This has been a similar outcome on discussions. I’m not going to lie to you: I’ve talked to Holts about it and I’ve talked to guys about it. You have that discussion, it’s cordial and you move on.”

The Capitals are in first place and figure to again be among the top contenders when the playoffs begin April 10. Despite their White House visit coming so late in the season, in the middle of a crucial stretch, they don’t believe it will negatively affect team chemistry or unity.

”We’re so respectful of each other and we’re so tight in this locker room that this won’t be a wedge or anything like that,” Oshie said. ”Guys get a chance to go to the White House. If that’s something they want to do, great. If it’s something they’re not comfortable with or something they don’t want to do, that’s fine, too. We’ll show up the next day ready to work and we’ll be just as close as we were the day before.”

Follow AP Hockey Writer Stephen Whyno on Twitter at https://twitter.com/SWhyno

More AP NHL: https://apnews.com/NHL and https://twitter.com/AP-Sports

Gallant responds to ‘clown’ DeBoer for ‘chirping’ comment

Getty
Leave a comment

The war of words in the Vegas Golden Knights-San Jose Sharks series has now extended to the coaches, and friends, things are getting spicy.

On Monday Sharks coach Peter DeBoer was critical of his counterpart, Gerard Gallant, for “chirping” at Sharks players during the series, saying: “I don’t know if it works in our favor. I mean, there’s still chatter. Their coach is chattering. He’s probably doing the most chattering. He’s talking to our players constantly during the game, which I haven’t seen before.”

DeBoer went on to call the chatter, “ridiculous.”

On Tuesday, just hours before the decisive Game 7 (10 p.m. ET; NBCSN; Live Stream), Gallant was asked about DeBoer’s comments and responded not only in great detail about the incidents, but by also calling DeBoer a clown.

“I really don’t want to talk about that, but I think I’m going to have to a little bit,” said Gallant. “For that clown to say that in the paper yesterday, it’s not right.”

[NBC 2019 STANLEY CUP PLAYOFF HUB]

From there, Gallant explained when and why he was chattering from the bench.

“There might have been two incidents that happened, and I’ll tell you both incidents,” Gallant began.

Logan Couture, I thought it was an embellishment, so I’m yelling at the referee. Not Logan Couture. The other one, in Game 2, Evander Kane, he is yelling at Ryan Reaves between the bench. Evander yells at me, he says, ‘hey coach, when are you going to send your big guy out on the ice and play him more than four minutes?’ I said, ‘he’s played 10 minutes every game and he’s going to play a lot more.’ Those are the two times. If I’m going to be a chirper and a loudmouth, I think people know me as a coach and respect me as a coach. If he’s going to yap about that, that’s a little unclassy for me.”

The trash talking in the series began with Reaves and Kane having a very public back-and-forth, complete with Kane referring to Reaves as “the muffin man” after their Game 3 fight and Reaves cracking jokes about Joe Thornton‘s age and vision.

This is only the Golden Knights’ second year in the NHL, but having already played the Sharks in the playoffs each year, and having some wild regular season matchups in between, it is very clear they have their first true rival.

The handshake line on Tuesday night, no matter who wins, should be an interesting one.

Related: Trash talk between Reaves, Kane almost as good as their fight

Adam Gretz is a writer for Pro Hockey Talk on NBC Sports. Drop him a line at phtblog@nbcsports.com or follow him on Twitter @AGretz.

Pressure once again on Babcock, Maple Leafs in Game 7

5 Comments

Trying to pick the winner of a Game 7 in the Stanley Cup Playoffs is completely futile. It is there that one of the most random sports, at its most random time of year, descends into its most random madness where anything and everything can happen. That unpredictability is a big part of what makes it so great and captivating.

It doesn’t really matter what happened in the previous six games of the series, or at any other point in the season because Game 7s usually come down to which goalie plays the best game for 60 minutes, or which team gets the right bounce at the right time. Those are things that are just impossible to predict before the game begins. You just have to watch and see how it all plays out.

With that said, I have no idea what is going to happen between the Boston Bruins and Toronto Maple Leafs on Tuesday night (7 p.m. ET; NBCSN; live stream) , but I do know this much — the Maple Leafs better win.

Don’t care how. Don’t care why. Don’t care what the score is. They just need to win.

They better win for the short-term reputation of their core, and they better win for the long-term reputation of their head coach.

I’m not going to go as far as to say Mike Babcock is coaching for his job on Tuesday night, because there is literally no indication of that. Plus, deciding the fate of your coach based on one game is kind of a foolish thing to do anyway. At this point he is either your coach, or he is not.

But at some point these people have to win something.

[NBC 2019 STANLEY CUP PLAYOFF HUB]

And I’m not even talking about the Eastern Conference or the Stanley Cup itself.

Just something.

A playoff round, for example, would be a huge place to start for an organization that hasn’t played in the second round since before the salary cap era began (2004), and has built a roster that has championship aspirations right now. This isn’t a team whose window is still a couple of years away from opening. They are in it right now, and with the Tampa Bay Lightning and Pittsburgh Penguins (and maybe Washington Capitals after Wednesday?) out of the picture this season the field is wide open for every team in the Eastern Conference.

But again, let’s just start with a round.

It would be huge for the best collection of young forwards in the NHL that was only strengthened this summer with the addition of John Tavares. At some point Round 1 exits — and a loss on Tuesday would be the third in a row — will not be enough for this core.

It would be huge for the highest paid head coach in the NHL whose actual results-based resume has not matched his reputation and league-wide standing in quite a while. At some point third place finishes (a Babcock coached team has not finished higher than third in its division since 2010-11) and Round 1 exits (he has not been out of Round 1 since 2012-13, and only once since 2010-11) will not be enough. I again go back to the fact that 25 different NHL head coaches have won a playoff series since Babcock last won one. If you’re the Maple Leafs, you’re not paying more than $6 million per season for those results.

It would be huge for Nazem Kadri, an incredibly valuable player, who once again failed his team by doing something completely reckless and senseless to take himself out of a playoff series. It would be an awfully bad look to have your team go out early, again, while you’re sitting in the press box for a significant chunk of the series for a totally avoidable reason. This will be the 14th playoff game between the Bruins and Maple Leafs the past two years, and Kadri has made himself available for only six of them. Would you be able to bring him back after that?

It is a Game 7 in the Stanley Cup Playoffs, and the pressure is on everyone to win.

If Boston loses it would no doubt be disappointing for the organization and the fans. But this Bruins’ core at least has a championship to fall back on, and has at least made some kind of a run at some point in the past decade. It would be frustrating, but it wouldn’t be something that would make the organization take a long look at itself in the mirror and try to figure out why this sort of thing keeps happening.

But Toronto? A loss on Tuesday night would sink them into a sea of questions regarding their core, their coach, and just why in the hell they can’t get through this Boston Bruins team.

That will not be fun — or good — for anyone.

Anything can happen in a Game 7, but Toronto needs this one more than any other team playing in a Game 7 in this round.

Adam Gretz is a writer for Pro Hockey Talk on NBC Sports. Drop him a line at phtblog@nbcsports.com or follow him on Twitter @AGretz.

AP/CP survey: Players pan delay of game, goalie interference

Getty Images
3 Comments

The pace and excitement of 3-on-3 overtime isn’t just a thrill for hockey fans – NHL players love it, too.

An Associated Press/Canadian Press survey of NHLPA representatives from all 31 teams found that 97% of those polled enjoy the league’s current overtime format during the regular season. The survey also found there are other rules the players are less thrilled with, ranging from delay-of-game penalties to confusion about goalie interference.

For Arizona Coyotes defenseman Kevin Connauton, the worst rule in hockey is resolving a game with a shootout when overtime fails to produce a winner.

”I don’t really like the shootout,” he said. ”I think you just play 3-on-3 and eventually someone will score.”

The survey found that 30 players like the 3-on-3 setup. Only Philadelphia defenseman Radko Gudas said he did not, preferring the previous 4-on-4 setup better. He and said having fewer players on the ice is too much like ”summertime hockey.”

”You work your bag off 60 minutes 5-on-5 and then all of a sudden it’s 3-on-3, a speedier, faster guy pretty much wins,” he said. ”I think 4-on-4 would be more hockey-like situations than 3-on-3.”

Still, his peers said they love it. Playing a five-minute 3-on-3 period provides a fair way to end the game while allowing fans to see some pure skill, Toronto Maple Leafs center John Tavares said.

”(It’s) exciting and you see the best players in the world with that type of time and space,” he said. ”It goes to show it’s a good way to end games. There’s no perfect science to this. We want a winner, but we can’t play forever. It’s a great way to showcase the talent, the skill of the game.”

The pace can be tough for the guys on the ice, New Jersey Devils goaltender Cory Schneider said.

”I hate it as a goalie, but I like it as a hockey fan,” he said. ”I think it’s better than the shootout, for sure. And I know it’s not perfect, but it gets you a decision, it gets people excited, you see some amazing skill and the way the league is now, it’s a great showcase for what these guys can do.”

The NHL moved away from 4-on-4 overtime in the 2015-16 regular season in a bid to create more space on the ice, allow for more goals and reduce the number of games going to shootouts. In the postseason, overtime is in 20-minute, sudden-death periods at 5-on-5. There are no shootouts.

Dylan DeMelo of the Ottawa Senators loves 3-on-3, but said there is one tweak he’d like to make. The defenseman said he wants to see a rule that would stop players from taking the puck over center ice and then back again to regroup. He thinks that would make OT even more entertaining.

There are a number of other rules players would love to see changed, including 63.2 that stipulates a delay of game penalty when a puck is shot or batted over the glass.

”I don’t think it should be a penalty. I think it should be the same as an icing. Whistle, faceoff in your end, no ability to change,” said Colorado Avalanche defenseman Ian Cole, one of five players (16%) who said the rule is the worst in hockey. ”A penalty for a play that has a high chance to happen in a course of a game or a (penalty kill) or whatever, it seems a little drastic.”

For other players, the uncertainty around what constitutes goalie interference is particularly irritating. Three players, or 10% of those in the survey, said the inconsistency was their least-favorite part of the NHL rule book.

”What is goaltender interference and what’s not?” said Edmonton defenseman Darnell Nurse. ”Maybe having more of a clear line, but any time you talk about something within the game, things happen so fast out there that judgment calls and whatnot, they’re hard to make.”

According to the league, there are only two situations where goaltender interference should result in a disallowed goal: if an attacking player stops the goalie from being able to move freely within his crease or defend his goal, or an attacking player intentionally or deliberately makes contact with the goalie.

Some players say what counts as interference in one game might not be the same in the next.

On Friday, Flyers goalie Cam Talbot tweeted his dissatisfaction with how the rule was applied in the Maple Leafs’ 2-1 win over the Boston Bruins.

”Once again the NHL goalie interference review is flawed,” wrote Talbot, who was not part of the AP/CP survey. ”Someone that’s played the game in the blue paint should be in the situation room. Games are being lost in the playoffs and it’s not right. (hash)inconsistent.”

Three players said what they most dislike are offside reviews. Nine others named other rules, including tripping being called alongside diving, and the ban on time outs being used when the puck is iced. Eleven players did not provide a specific answer.

”Rules are the rules. I just follow them,” said winger Anders Lee of the New York Islanders.

More AP NHL: http://www.apnews.com/NHL and http://www.twitter.com/AP-Sports

Sabres’ Zach Bogosian out 5-6 months after hip surgery

Getty Images
1 Comment

BUFFALO, N.Y. (AP) — Buffalo Sabres defenseman Zach Bogosian will miss five to six months after his second hip operation in a little more than a year.

The Sabres provided the update Tuesday, two weeks after their season ended. Bogosian missed the final eight games with what the team referred to only as a lower-body injury.

The timetable for recovery means Bogosian is in jeopardy of missing the start of next season.

The surgery is the latest setback for the 28-year-old hard-hitting defenseman, who has played 70 games just twice in his 11 NHL seasons. Bogosian was limited to playing just 18 games in 2017-18 before season-ending hip surgery in January of that season.

Last season, he finished with three goals and 19 points in 65 games, matching the most he played since 2011-12, when Bogosian was with Winnipeg.

More AP NHL: https://apnews.com/NHL and https://twitter.com/AP-Sports