As you've probably heard by now, Peter Forsberg has returned to the Colorado Avalanche. Forsberg signed what's been called a one-year deal, but his contract won't really last that long; it just covers him for the rest of this season.
The Avs have 19 games left in their season, unless the return of Peter the Great propels them into the playoffs. Currently, according to that ESPN.com article, they're four "points" out of the last playoff spot. (Teams get two points for a win, and one for an overtime loss.)
Can they do it? I have no idea; I don't really watch hockey. The biggest casualty of the NHL's labor stoppage a few years back, from my standpoint, was the Avs losing their rightful place as the NHL's New York Yankees, or perhaps I should say as its Boston Red Sox. Instead of picking up superstars like Rob Blake right before the playoffs every year, suddenly the Avs had to start competing on more fair grounds. And, pathetically, the NHL lost a lot of its appeal for me.
Can Forsberg change that? He probably won't, unless the Avs make the playoffs, but let it be known that he was the man back in the day, and easily one of my favorite athletes in the city. I first heard of Forsberg during the 1996 Stanley Cup Finals, when he picked up a hat trick in the first period of Game 2, which was pretty cool once I found out what a hat trick was.
Later I started watching the Avs, at least a little, and I came to learn what a great player Forsberg was. And he was phenomenal, combining speed, strength and skill in a package few other NHL players could match. No player with his puck-handling skills could absorb or dish out a hit like he could. In a way, he was the perfect offensive hockey player. One of the few moments I remember from his playing days was a spectacular final-minute breakaway goal to win a game, which I'm pretty sure was against the Red Wings. It was a moment few could have pulled off, but with Forsberg's coordination and control, the goal almost felt like destiny.
(As a side note, there's almost nothing cooler as a fan than having a ready-made championship contender move into your city, especially when you don't quite realize what they've got. Over time, you learn things like, oh, this goalie was MVP of the playoffs twice, or your team'ssecond-line center, who everyone likes more than the first guy anyway, is an Olympic hero in his homeland. On the other hand, it spoils you to an absurd degree and you end up quitting on them.)
The second-saddest part of Forsberg's career in Denver, for me, was when his ruptured spleen caused him to miss the last several games of the 2001 playoffs, when the Avs again won the Stanley Cup. Personally I don't think injuries made him any less of a key contributor to the title: clearly the Avs wouldn't have been in that spot to begin with without Forsberg. I just wished he could have been on the ice for the Finals again, now that we'd finally gotten past the Stars. And then the saddest day was the one when the Avs let him go, which officially brought their days of dominance to an end. There's no question Forsberg's no longer the player he once was, but it sure is exciting to have him back.
3 comments:
Before the labor stoppage I would rarely miss an Avs game. Now, I probably only watch one or two Avs games all year. I have a hard time supporting the NHL after they canceled the 04-05 season. Sadly I don't think I'm alone. I remember before the stoppage when everyone in Denver was watching the Av's games. You would know the days the Avs had games because you would see about a thousand cars with Avs flags flying and that was literally the only thing everyone talked about. People would have super bowl-like parties when the Avs played the Wings. When they played them last week I hardly even heard about it.
However, maybe getting Forsberg back is just the motivation I need to start supporting the Avalanche again. Thanks for the info on the upcoming schedule Mike.
I do have some co-workers who've been to a few Avs games this year, which makes them the most hardcore hockey fans I've seen in years. Like you said, Denver was a pretty sweet hockey town for a few years, though with natural attrition as the team's core aged we wouldn't have been as good anyway, and I wonder whether hockey would have been as popular here for much longer anyway. I mean, baseball didn't really last. If you're not the Broncos, you have to be really good here for anyone to care.
I don't know, the lockout sucked, but on the other hand I don't know what else the NHL could have done at that point. The players were making way too much compared to what the league was bringing in. I guess a lot of sports owners don't really buy teams to try and make money, and it's no big deal to me if they're losing dough, but I can understand why the league wanted to restore some sanity to the whole situation.
It's also funny to me how a pro sports strike is blamed on greedy athletes, but the NHL lockout wasn't ever really blamed on greedy owners, who a) are way richer than players, and b) who'd spent themselves into trouble in the first place.
Forsberg's return is great news, even if the Avs don't make it into the post-season. I occasionally listen to a particular morning show in DC whose DJ is a major hockey fan - and the last I heard, Forsberg wasn't coming back this year at all. He is one of the all-around best players in the history of hockey, and I am stoked to see him back with the Avs, even if it is only for a 19-game farewell tour.
Like you guys, I have not followed hockey at all since the strike. Regardless of whether the players or the owners were more greedy, the players had the most to lost from the strike - so, as I said at the time, the strike was a bad idea for the players. (In fact, the players ended up accepting a worse labor deal after the strike than the one the league had offered before the strike - so the strike itself actually made the players worse off). Now the players are paying for it again because no one is coming to the games, which will further hold down player salaries for years.
Post a Comment