I read with interest both On Frozen Blog's piece "Renewed Questions of Leadership" and Ed Frankovic's "Caps Off-season Focus Should Be on Leadership".  I know both these guys very well from our time in the press box together, not to mention an episode or two of working out with 12 ounce curls, and have the utmost respect for both.  Please take a moment or two to read their opinions if you haven't already.

They know my way of thought as well, so I think they will understand my position when I say, respectfully, that I disagree with them and think they are both over-simplifying the point and romanticising a notion that is not quantifiable.  And they are doing it, maybe even subconsciously, because the real answer is too tough to take.

They both go to great extents to quote executives and others in the game about the importance of "Leadership".  It's a concept that is as deeply rooted in hockey as the mythical "playoff hockey." (I guess Vancouver didn't play "playoff hockey" last night since they won 7-3.)  Hockey is the only sport that bestows a decoration on the uniform of one of its players signifying he is the captain.  But for the most part, it's just that: a decoration.

Leadership isn't taught.  It isn't acquired. It isn't tangible.  If George McPhee, or any executive, could identify it or train someone to do it, they already would.  Leaders aren't made, they are born.  You can train people to manage others, to teach others, to instruct others, to discipline others. But only Leaders know how to lead.

It has to be self-motivated.

McPhee has gone out the last couple of seasons to acquire several veterans that were supposed to bring "leadership."  Jason Chimera. Mike Knuble. Scott Hannan. Jason Arnott. Dennis Wideman.  He had a pretty good one in the room already in Brooks Laich. All are tremendously hard workers, experienced, talented, sacrificing; honorable.  Knuble and Arnott have rings; Arnott a former captain.  Are these not the requirements that John and Ed spoke about in their posts?  Is the fact that the Caps flamed out in the second round this season evidence these men are not leaders?

Were these players leaders during the regular season, when the Caps came back from an eight-game losing streak in December to capture the Eastern Conference regular season title?  Were they leaders in the first round when the Capitals stymied the New York Rangers in five games? Are we to believe then that they simply forgot to lead in the second round?  I hardly think so.

And how about the captain, the man on this team that wears the decorative "C' on his sweater?  There's not a man in that room that doesn't have the utmost respect for Alex Ovechkin.  There's also not a man in that room that wants to win more than he does.  Isn't that where respect -- leadership -- comes from?

The problem with the Capitals isn't a lack of leadership, on the ice, in the room, or in the organization.  If anything, the problem is with some of the individuals in the room and their lack of clarity of purpose.  There are several on this team that are "happy to be here."  They may be extremely talented players, and at times say the right things, but repeatedly cower when faced with hardship and sacrifice. 

These players are not capable of being led, not at this time anyway. At some point in their careers they may realize that all the money, fame and notoriety is meaningless without achieving the ultimate goal. But for now, they are too self-centered to concentrate, really seriously concentrate, on the matter at hand and sacrifice personal gains for the team's greater pursuit.  No less an expert on leadership than Gen. George S. Patton alluded to this concept in his speech to the Third Army in 1944.

"Each man must not think only of himself, but also of his buddy fighting beside him. We don't want yellow cowards in this Army. They should be killed off like rats. If not, they will go home after this war and breed more cowards. The brave men will breed more brave men. Kill off the... cowards and we will have a nation of brave men."

Now I'm not comparing the game of ice hockey to the rigors of World War II, but the concept of leadership is the same regardless.  No, the problem with this team isn't the lack of leaders, its that it has a lack of followers.  Cull the cowards from the program as Patton suggests and watch how effective the leaders that are already assembled can be.

_______________________________________________________

Ultimately though, and this is the point that no one wants to address: you have to have the players.  For all the fawning media coverage of this team locally, the real truth is that this team is still significantly flawed in several areas and honestly, just isn't good enough to compete past the level they have achieved the last few seasons.  They aren't advancing because of lack of leadership, it's because they aren't good enough yet.

Again, from Patton:

"The publicity I have been getting, a good deal of which is untrue, and the rest of it ill considered, has done me more harm than good. The only way you get on in this profession is to have the reputation of doing what you are told as thoroughly as possible."

Aynyway, here are the points I consider to be this teams biggest weaknesses.

• This team is weak physically down the middle.  Nicklas Backstrom and Marcus Johansson are both extremely talented players and supreme skaters, but lack the physicality necessary to compete with stronger players. It's no secret that if you put a body on these guys they aren't going to answer the bell, and it's more glaring in the playoffs when the sheet gets shorter. None of the Capitals centers in the playoffs except for Boyd Gordon on the fourth line had a faceoff percentage higher than 50 percent.  That's unacceptable.
• There's not nearly enough toughness on this team.  Matt Hendricks and Matt Bradley were both willing during the regular season to drop the gloves when they had to, but I'm not talking about that. I'm talking about players willing to get into the corners, dig pucks out, stand in the crease and deliver a pounding.  Not take it, but deliver it.  The Capitals lose more one-on-one puck battles than any other team in the league. This team is in need of a couple of rugged wingers (and probably a defenseman as well) willing to get their noses dirty and push people around.  They don't need fighters, they need physically stronger players to give their supremely talented players more room to skate.
• There's no offensive contribution from the third and fourth lines at all.  17-of-21 goals scored by forwards in the playoffs by the Capitals were by just six players.  Look at Tampa Bay, their third line of Bergenheim, Downie and Moore have combined for 13 goals and 19 assists in 13 games.  Boston has 12 players with more than one goal in the playoffs. You don't need a 30-goal scorer on the third line, but you need contribution.  Bergenheim has made himself a LOT of money this post-season as he becomes a UFA.
• I've said this before, but I also think Bruce Boudreau needs to go back to what got him here.  He doesn't like playing the trap.  He's never implemented it before and has never taught it.  His players are ill-fitted for it and don't like it.  The lack of conviction from his players was evident because of the lack of conviction in the system by the coach.  Live by the sword or die by it.  I maintain that Boudreau allowed the Canadian media to alter his judgment on the heels of the loss to Montreal last year and the pain of the eight-game losing streak. Another thing Patton said in his address to the Third Army in 1944 applies here (forgive the rough language):

"I don't want to get any messages saying, "I am holding my position." We are not holding a thing... We are advancing constantly and we are not interested in holding onto anything, except the enemy's balls. We are going to twist his balls and kick the living shit out of him all of the time. Our basic plan of operation is to advance and to keep on advancing regardless of whether we have to go over, under, or through the enemy."

• Lastly, Alex Ovechkin needs to elevate his game.  The league has "figured him out." If he wants to lead this team and become one of the greats of all-time, he's going to have to elevate his game past what it is now.  He's going to have to learn when to try to carry the puck and when to give it up.  He's going to have to dump to the opposite corner and crash the goal.  He's going to have to reign in his emotion and channel it rather than let it get the best of him.  And he needs to be in supreme shape at the beginning, middle and end of the season.

Lastly, and I know this is the hardest part of all, but I implore all Caps fans to continue exercising patience. 

There are a lot of Caps fans that have no idea how it was back in the dark days, when this team was a laughingstock or worse, an afterthought.  The Washington Capitals franchise is enjoying an unprecedented run of success and with the two best players signed long-term, there's little reason to think that run won't be continued.  This team is young, talented and managed by dedicated and knowledgeable executives. They just have some issues that still need to be addressed.

There is no reason to blow this thing up and start over.  Bringing in new coaches or executives would only delay the process, not speed it up.  At least in my opinion.

The window isn't closing, as some folks would lead you to believe, it's barely been opened.  They just have to fix the cracks.

Who is to blame when a team of great promise does not fulfill those expectations? It's a difficult question to answer. One on hand, you can place the blame on the coaching staff, failing to get the most out of the players. On the other, you have to place responsibility on the players that take the ice of field. Ultimately, you can lay out the most intricate, elaborate game plan know to the human mind, but the players have to perform to succeed.

Thus is the conundrum with the Washington Capitals. Every season under the guidance of coach Bruce Boudreau has ended in heartbreak. It hasn't officially happened yet, but you can see it from here. Only three teams in the sports grand history have come back from being down zero games to three.

And it hasn't been the normal variety of getting outplayed in the playoffs -- some teams are just better than others -- but it's the spectacular fashion of failure in the sport's biggest stage that had magnified and intensified the problem. Blowing a 3-1 lead to Pittsburgh in 2009. First round exit to the eighth seed in 2010. Getting swept thus far by a Southeast Division foe this season. The failure is both spectacular and uncanny.  It's been the biggest consistent in Bruce Boudreau's coaching tenure.

Where do you lay the blame?

I have been, and remain, a Boudreau supporter.  He's the reason the Caps are where they are today. He took a perennially boring, underachieving squad and turned them into the most exciting and interesting team in the NHL. But then, surrendering to criticism, he completely tore down and remodeled his structure and systems. He succumbed to the intense media scrutiny of last year's playoff disaster and a strange extended regular season losing streak, and altered not only the way this team plays, but most definitely changed its personality.

The Caps ran roughshod over the league in March, propelling themselves to the top of the Eastern Conference standings, utilizing the new tenets of defense, goaltending, and opportunistic offense. Boudreau took supremely gifted athletes and gave them a different game plan to follow, and they found success.  But the chinks in the armor were there to witness too, it was just easier to dismiss them when they were winning games.

Even in the first round series win over New York, it was still the Capitals supreme talent that ultimately won out over a lesser-skilled team. But faced with a more-skilled team with superior dedication and discipline, the Capitals are the ones being frustrated.

The mood around Tampa is strange. Lightning fans are shocked they've had this success against what they view as a superior team. But the Capitals talent is being hidden under this new system of defensive responsibility, as it has been all season long.

The players in the room after the game last night could not find answers to the questions they were posed. Maybe they're so close to the problem they can't identify it. Maybe they know but don't dare speak it. But it's evident.

"They're uncanny when they want to get a goal.  They just snap their fingers, hit a button and dial it up. You can see it's like they flipped a switch. I don't know what it is. It leaves you flabbergasted." Mike Knuble uttered those words about the Lightning last night.  They used to say that about the Caps.

The soul of this team has been crushed.  They were once the most exciting team in the league. They had a joyful, energetic, singular talent leading them on the ice and leading the league in offense.  Now, they're stuck in a system that is apparent that very few of them want to play.  They are playing undisciplined, unfocused, and without emotion. It's like asking a thoroughbred to strap on a plow.

They went from a system that was designed to win games to one that is designed to not lose games.  Playoff hockey indeed.

So over on Twitter today there's been raging debate on who folks think Bruce Boudreau should go with in goal for the Washington Capitals for Game One in the playoffs.  Essentially, who is this team's playoff goalie?

Japers' Rink asked the question today too, and provided the stats for an analytical approach to evaluating the decision.

Does Boudreau go with Michal Neuvirth, who the Caps have ridden to 27 of their 48 wins this season and won two Calder Cups?  Or should he go with the goalie with better statistics this season (in many fewer games) and that he's trusted more in the playoffs the last two seasons, Semyon Varlamov?

It's an interesting debate, because both goalies are immensely talented.  And as 50 Mission Caps points out, because of the motivational factor and psyche of the team, you can really only switch goalies once in a series, because as they put it:

"...the whole point of changing your starter in the playoffs is that it gives your team an excuse for games they've already lost. It's not actually about goaltending, it's about giving your team amnesia, or some sort of get-out-of-adverse-momentum free card. Under no circumstances is this to become a rotation by whimsy, or gut feel, or coin flip. Give your 'tender and your team a fighting chance. The minute you start to flip-flop back and forth, it stops being about a fresh start and starts being about your lousy goaltending. And no one wins in the playoffs with lousy goaltending."

Should this decision be made on statistics?  Should it be made on tenure?  Should it be made on gut instinct?

Or is it a matter of style preference?

Neuvirth is a technical goaltender, cut from the cloth of classic goalies like Ken Dryden, Bernie Parent and Olaf Kolzig.  Varlamov is an extremely gifted athletic goalie a la Dominic Hasek.  Heck, the Caps even have their crazy psycho goalie in Braden Holtby along the lines of Billy Smith and Ron Hextall ::shudder::.

Personally, I prefer the technical goalie.  I think they are more dependable and night after night give a more balanced performance.  Athletic goalies are spectacular to watch when they are on, but hold on to your hats if they aren't "feeling right" that night.  Again, it's a matter of preference.

All three goalies are ridiculously talented at such a young age and gives the Caps a stable of goalies that every team in the league should be envious of.  But we're not debating the long-term solution of Caps goalie for the next ten years.  We're talking about the next ten weeks or so.

So, who you got?

"Playoff Hockey" is here.

You want tense, tight, low scoring games?  You got 'em, in spades.

You want defensive battles where one mistake can cost you the game?  Have them too.  Ask John Erskine about last night's 3-2 loss to the Phoenix Coyotes.

You want exciting, thrilling, high-speed hockey?  The kind that packed the Verizon Center last season as the Washington Capitals were en route to the President's Trophy?  A thing of the past.

Because we all know, every single one of us knows, that high-scoring hockey can't possibly work during the playoffs.  Right?  The fact that three of the final four teams in the playoffs last season were third, fourth and eighth in the league in scoring was just a fluke, right?

That was the message last spring, as the Caps were bounced out of the first round by the Montreal Canadiens.  The sentiment was permeated through the national and local media, message boards, chat rooms, blog comments and other social media.

"This team plays too soft."

"This team doesn't play defense."

"This team doesn't play 'Playoff Hockey'."

No less an expert on the Caps than Ray Whitney, a player that faced this team several times a season with Carolina before joining Phoenix, had this to say about the Caps between periods of last night's game.

Well, after playing against them the last five years in Carolina, eight [or] six times a year, this is a totally different team.  They still have the same skill level, but you can tell that they've made a conscious effort to play smarter defensively. And not really what I was expecting out of them, but they're certainly doing a good job of it....

This is kind of [Phoenix'] style of play. And we're kind of comfortable with it. To see them doing that is surprising, but I think also they're on to something. I think that's what's gonna, as a group, maybe take them up to that next level."

See.  Even Ray Whitney thinks that the Caps are doing the right thing by dumbing down the game and playing "Playoff Hockey". 

So everyone that made the comments last spring that the Caps don't play "Playoff Hockey" were right.  All the Caps had to do was start playing a more defensive game.  Concentrate on their own end.  Clog up the neutral zone and add a couple stay-at-home defensemen and this team will be much better in the playoffs.

Even Ray Whitney thinks so!

After falling to sixth in the conference after last night's loss, the Caps just have to hope they get there first.  Then they'll be absolutely fine.  Ready even. 

Because we all know that coming into the playoffs as the first seed in the conference is undesirable.  Having the best record in the game means nothing.  Being the most exciting team in the league is laughable when everyone knows that style of play just can't win in the playoffs.

If the Capitals are really lucky, they'll fall to the eighth seed and get to play Philadelphia, the highest scoring team in the Eastern Conference.  They'll be ripe for upset just like the Caps were last season.  Philly obviously doesn't play "Playoff Hockey" since they score so much.

No, this Caps team has them right where they want them.  They'll show all the critics.  You want defense?  WE'LL PLAY DEFENSE!  Look, we're sixth in the league in goals against per game!  Our penalty kill is second in the league!!!  We play PLAYOFF HOCKEY all year long!!!

People, don't fret because this team can't buy a goal from their top line.  You should be rejoicing!  This is EXACTLY what we want.  More defensive responsibility.  Did you see that Ovechkin back-check last night, when he picked the pocket of the unsuspecting Coyote forward?  That's "Playoff Hockey" right there, boy.

People that are complaining now about the lack of offense certainly can't be the same people that complained last spring about the lack of defensive responsibility.  Because that would be hypocritical, and we all know that hockey fans are hard-working, honest, respectful folk that embody the same spirit as "Playoff Hockey."

Be careful what you wish for.  Bruce Boudreau just may give it to you.