Mike Chen's Hockey Blog (In Exile)

One of my favorite September rituals is buying all of the hockey preview magazines I can find, then spending a day reading them from cover to cover (my wife calls it "obsessive" but hey, she's the one who bought a bazillion expansion packs for The Sims 2, so touche). My favorite always is The Hockey News Yearbook because it's generally the right balance of stats, previews, and interesting articles. And they've got a little thing called the Top 50 players, which is always fun to debate.

You could argue about individual player rankings till you're blue in the face but one particular item stood out to me more than the rest. In the spirit of Festivus (it's only a few months away) and the Airing of the Grievances, I present Joe Thornton vs. Marian Gaborik. In the great words of Frank Costanza, I got a lot of problems with you people -- and now you're gonna hear about it!

(By the way, I imagine this post automatically disqualifies for me Hockey News Idol)

I have no problems with Gaborik but it does seem rather strange to me to rate him as high as #13, especially over other forwards like Joe Thornton (#21). Now, let's just do a quick Thornton vs. Gaborik comparison over the past three years:

Thornton: 245 games, 53 goals, 255 assists, 335 points

Gaborik: 190 games, 110 goals, 96 assists, 206 points

Simple math tells us that Gaborik's a better goal scorer but in terms of pure production, Thornton's clicking at a much higher rate. Also, Gaborik is notoriously injury prone while Thornton's only missed one game in three years. Based on regular season value, it doesn't make much sense for Thornton to be rated so low (or Gaborik so high).

Ah, but what about the playoffs? Isn't that Thornton's Achilles' Heel? Well, even though Thornton hasn't put on a take-things-over-and-kick-ass performance a la Jarome Iginla, it's hard to argue his numbers: 30 points in 35 games. As for Gaborik? 5 points in 11 games.

East coast bias? Nah, I'm pretty sure hockey folks all over the world know how good Thornton is. I think this is a case of Thornton's playoff-underachieving stigma haunting him, especially because San Jose is annually picked to be a Cup favorite.

When the Lightning were rumored to be in the offer sheet race for Andrej Meszaros, the "What the hell?" light bulb went off in my head. Here was a team that had already seen all sorts of upheaval and lacked any real veteran presence on the blueline outside of Filip Kuba. With a wealth of young defense already, including Matt Carle, Paul Ranger, and Alexander Picard, did the Bolts really need any further youth on defense?

Since I'm no former-NHLer-turned-real-estate-tycoon or Hollywood-producer-of-bad-horror-movies, I'm not in charge of the Lightning, so I guess I can't really say what was going through the minds of Tampa's brain trust when absurd contracts such as the Radim Vrbata one-good-season contract were handed out. But when the deal for Meszaros happened, I was just dumbfounded.

Let's make it clear that Meszaros has plenty of talent and plenty of skill. Senators fans saw that early on in his career, though the last two seasons have been a little bit more frustrating. In fact, the consistency of Meszaros's play has almost mirrored that of new teammate Matt Carle: an impressive splash followed by stretches of good and bad play.

It's unfair to judge any young defenseman as they typically don't hit their stride until 25 or 26. Don't forget, Chris Pronger was pretty awful in his first few seasons too. Still, to add yet another variable -- and a long-term, big-salary commitment -- borderlines on the absurd.

Consider this: at the end of last season, Tampa's top-four D consisted of Paul Ranger, Dan Boyle, Filip Kuba, and Alexandre Picard. A quick look at the current blueline shows the average age is 23.

Let's see, complete revamping of the forward lines, a new coach, an untested goalie, and the youngest defense in the NHL. That's an extremely high-stakes chemistry experiment, and while the Bolts may catch lightning in a bottle (no pun intended), the possibility that Meszaros, Carle, and Ranger are mature at the same time is slight.

Still, you could argue that Kuba -- he of the bad defensive zone turnover -- wasn't necessarily a loss, and that Meszaros's upside exceeds the just-as-young Picard. Going by that theory, the Bolts didn't really lose much at all.

I see the logic in that argument but for me, the bottom line is this: between Carle and Meszaros, you've got $8 million in long-term cap space tied up in two defensemen who've only shown flashes of brilliance. And NHL history is peppered with players with flashes of brilliance. After all, Jeff Friesen was once touted to be a future all-star left winger and now he's begging the San Jose Sharks for a tryout contract.

Well, in that time when my blog was down, I managed to fill the void by downloading the new demos for NHL 2K9 and NHL 09 on to my PS3. I'm not particularly loyal to any series--I had NHL all the way up to the mid-2000s, then I bought 2K for a few years, and last year I went back to the EA game.

Having played both of them in demo form, I can honestly say that there's no real competition here. The EA version simply outclasses 2K9 in all aspects. Of course, demo play is often limited (both only give you one period with no real options) but the core mechanics of EA's game are so much more refined than 2K9 that it feels like 2K simply slapped updated rosters on the PS2's 2K6.

First off, you'll notice that the graphics are much better in EA's game. 2K9's players all look like strange blockhead versions of themselves, like they took a video of Legos morphing into hockey players, then used the halfway morph as their model for NHLers. Facial animations and structures just look off, and the jerseys look saran-wrapped on to plastic body models. Not good.

EA's usually known for a fairly tight presentation, and while their graphics aren't a significant improvement over last year's game, I do think the faces are just a little cleaner and have less plastic sheen than last year. Jersey textures are also better, and in some cases, the lettering/numbering actually appears stitched on rather than a flat graphic. It's subtle, but it's a nice touch. Checking animation (both hitting and falling) is really improved--not too surprising since this was a big marketing point of the game.

What about gameplay? Here's where EA's game really shines. 2K9's control scheme is dated, which is a shame considering they really tried to reinvent hockey video games back in the early/mid-2000s. There's the old speed burst/check button that worked great 15 years ago but now feels out of place. The use of the right analog isn't bad but it doesn't feel as tight as EA's. EA also seems to have added more relevant features, such as a "protect the puck" button that doesn't just brace you against the boards. In fact, this feature is great for driving the net. There's a new "lift the stick" button on defense, and for anyone who's actually hit the ice in real life, you'll know how much this is part of actually playing.

It's nitpicky to complain about a menu system but EA games are usually pretty good about an intuitive interface. I can't say the same for the 2K version; there's menus and sub-menus and buttons to get out of just the sub-menus but not the menus and...well, the whole thing is a mess. It's so simple to press start for a menu, then use the left/right motions to go into a sub-menu, then hit X to select something. Does anyone really need to mess with that formula?

EA's implemented a new Be A Pro feature which lets you basically be one player for an entire season. Part of the appeal of this is creating your own player, then getting drafted by a team and simulating the experience of just being that one player for the entire season. For the purposes of the demo, though, you understand the gameplay aspect of it, and I think it's actually really cool. In this case, you play as the center for the entire one-period demo (either Sidney Crosby or Henrik Zetterberg). As the center, the camera follows you regardless of where the puck is, though an arrow appears to help you with where you should be going.

This feature gives gamers a totally different understanding and context for the game. Whether that's good or bad is up to you. I personally liked it, but I've always liked my sports games to be more simulation and less arcade. As an actual player, I've spent about half my time playing center and I was curious to see how that translated to this feature in terms of defensive responsibilities, breakouts, and cycling. I'm pleased to say that the AI's been programmed pretty well, and a lot of the things I've been taught about where I should go or who I should cover have translated into the game. It's a unique experience, and little things -- such as me covering for the D while they rush the puck -- are nicely integrated into the game so that it's not just a hodge-podge of everyone playing the puck.

Here's an example: on one shift, I won the faceoff back to my D; I went into an open area on the half-boards and called for a pass, then passed it off to my wing in the slot. The puck caromed around and out the zone and a big blue arrow pointed me towards where my defensive responsibilities were. I got into the the defensive zone and looked for the open Red Wing in the slot while my two Penguins defensemen covered down low. I got behind my guy, lifted his stick, then lightly checked him until the puck cleared. My pinching D was rushing the puck, so I stayed behind him, and as he broke into the zone, I stayed on the blueline to cover his position. Once he dumped the puck to a wing, he swung back around and I drove the net.

A lot of the nuances here are subtle but I think they give you a better understanding of the game in real life and it offers a totally different way to play it as a video game. And if this simulation-style feature doesn't appeal to you, you can always play it in the standard mode of switching to whoever has the puck.

Either way, the core mechanics of the game, along with the graphics, put EA's NHL 09 far above NHL 2K9. I know where I'm going to be plunking my dollars down in a few weeks.