Posted: Tue May 5, 1998

Sports Illustrated hockey writer Kostya Kennedy will answer your NHL questions through the Stanley Cup Finals. Click here to send a question.

For all the apparent upsets in the first round, none was really surprising outside of Ottawa's domination of New Jersey. Edmonton, Buffalo and Montreal are right where we thought they'd be. Those Senators really are adorable, the way they zip around out there, aren't they?

We've been getting some great questions—a pleasure to read and respond to. Many of you have asked about second-round prospects. Some of those issues are covered in my second-round predictions, so if you don't find the answers here you can check that out.

Eight teams left. Each needs 12 wins for the Stanley Cup. Every team is coming into the second round on some sort of high. Let's see who maintains it. I wonder if any of these guys will put on their TVs and actually feel comfortable watching the playoffs from his couch: Marc Crawford? Jacques Lemaire? Bob Clarke? Fellas, you coulda been contendahs.

Should Colorado coach Marc Crawford be looking over his shoulder?    (David E. Klutho)

If you were Avalanche coach Marc Crawford would you be answering your telephone? After this year's double disasters of the Olympics and now the shellacking by the Oilers, I would be scanning the Help Wanted sections.
—Trevor Kuzio, Kuala Lampur, Malaysia

Even more unseemly is how Crawford keeps losing his cool behind the bench—he went ballistic against Scotty Bowman last year, and this year he got into an embarrassing behind-the-bench shouting match with Oilers coach Ron Low. I like Marc Crawford—he's frank and passionate, which are two key ingredients for a hockey coach. But his superbly talented teams have often disappointed. There's definite friction between he and GM Pierre Lacroix, and it wouldn't be suprising if Crawford is dismissed. He'll be answering his phone, though, now and in the months to come; he's a stand-up guy.

The Flyers lost last year and this because their system of play is absolutely terrible. I hate to hear the talk about trading Eric Lindros that has surfaced this year. No, he hasn't gotten the team to the promised land yet. As a Flyers fan, though, I shudder at the thought of watching him step into his own on some other team.

Bob Clarke seems to go nuts and start dismantling teams when he's been GM for a few years. Is it time to get rid of him before he does something stupid with Lindros?
—Steve Liggins, San Diego

What a bad year for Clarke, eh? A brief rundown of what he's done: fires coach Terry Murray; snubs Mark Messier for Lindros on the Canadian Olympic team; gives free agent Chris Gratton a ridiculous $10 million signing bonus, upsetting his stars, Lindros and John LeClair; panics when he loses a few regular season games to the Devils and fires Wayne Cashman with 20 games to go; allows Cashman to stay behind the bench as an assistant; trades for Sean Burke, a goalie with little playoff experience; gets rid of budding star Janne Niinimaa at the trade deadline in exchange for merely decent tough-guy defenseman Dan McGillis. There's more, but I'll spare you.

Clarke has been running his team as if he's terrified of losing, and that's no way to run anything. He is Bobby Clarke, though, so for all his silly blunders his job is probably safe. That doesn't mean Lindros's is. Sure, it would hurt to see Lindros thrive elsewhere, but that simply may be for the best. If Clarke wants to re-tool around Lindros he has to hope Lindros somehow develops into a stand-up leader. The Lindros-for-Pavel Bure trade rumors with Vancouver are sexy as hell—Lindros could learn from a real intense leader in the Canucks' Messier and would also spare Messier from having to be the No. 1 center at his age. Bure would give the big old Flyers one of the true pure goal scorers in the league. You'd only trade Lindros if you can get a real gamebreaker in return. Anything less would be rash. Hmmm, maybe Clarke does have to go.

The St. Louis Blues looked positively scary in sweeping the L.A. Kings. What weaknesses do they have that other teams can exploit? How do you assess their chances of beating Detroit in light of the sweep?
—L. Man, Tampa

Yes, the Blues were in fine form, and they're healthier than they've been all year. Honestly, they don't have any major "weaknesses." I do think, though, that the back end of their roster can be taken advantage of by the deeply talented Red Wings. The Wings' third and fourth lines will outskate whoever the Blues put out against them. Late in games and deep in the series the Blues will get beat or break down a bit. The short series certainly helped the Blues, but I still think the Wings will win in a long series.

Why do the media seem to ignore the fact that the Washington Capitals won their first-round series against Boston without sniper Peter Bondra for five of the six games? With the addition of Brian Bellows and Esa Tikkannen, are the Caps suddenly deep enough to play without their star player? Will Bondra's fresh legs be too much for Ottawa?

Also, will the Sens bench the hot Damian Rhodes in hopes of a repeat performance by Ron Tugnutt, who has played well against the Caps?
—Michael Lewis, Quito, Ecuador

Michael, some of this stuff is addressed in my second-round predictions, but ... I certainly don't dismiss the fact that the Capitals had to go it without Bondra healthy much of the series. I think if he'd been in the lineup and 100% for all the games, it would have been a much easier, probably shorter, series for the Caps. Bondra returns as the most explosive player in the matchup against Ottawa.

I'd be shocked to see Tugnutt unless Rhodes really plays horribly. The Senators are playing very condfidently in front of him, he just got the better of Devils star goalie Martin Brodeur and he seems to be in a zone. Did you see how Rhodes went and stayed in a hotel the nights before home games in the opening series? He wanted to be by himself and focus, which he's been doing splendidly. I don't think Rhodes is a Cup-caliber keeper but he's hot now, and there's no point messing with that.

Do you think that the role of the coach in hockey, as in any sport, is a bit exaggerated? Many teams seem to jump the gun, feeling the need to place the blame on someone, and fire the coach, as was the case with Chicago. A good coach is necessary, but don't you think that success or failure is due in larger part to the players' performance on the ice?
—James Lucas, Cleveland

You pretty well answered your own question. A great coach—e.g., Detroit's Scotty Bowman—can do a lot for a team over the long haul of a grueling season. But this is a players' game. I think game-coaching means less in the NHL than in the NBA because you don't have as much opportunity for play-by-play strategy. What teams need to do is stick with a guy for at least a few years and try to avoid the merry-go-round of coaches that afflicts so many teams. It's all about motivation at the NHL level: If a coach loses his team, as Craig Hartsburg did in Chicago, you need to make a change. But as long as everyone's working together, it's up to the players to get better and to win or lose. Period.

If you were the Detroit GM Ken Holland, would you have done as he did and re-sign Sergei Federov or would you have waited till next year to sign Dallas' Mike Modano?
—Nick M., Detroit

Detroit did better by matching the offer Fedorov received from Carolina. Remember that the Red Wings have a good chance to win the Cup this year and Fedorov is a major component in that effort. Also, though Fedorov has griped in the past he works excellently in the Wings' left-wing-lock system, and I think he's a better all-around player than Modano—though it's close. Lastly, if Detroit had waited for Modano, they couldn't have controlled where he chose to sign. Modano could have re-signed with Dallas, for instance, which is exactly what happened, making this question pure and delightful what-if folly.

Why isn't San Jose goalie Mike Vernon ever mentioned in the same breath with his contemporaries: Patrick Roy, Grant Fuhr or even Curtis Joseph? He's only backstopped two teams to the Stanley Cup and been to the Finals two other times.
—Peri Hwang, Farmington Hills, Mich.

Vernon is underrated by the press, but he's got good respect around the league. He let in some bad goals with Calgary and, sadly, even though he won those Cups you mention, the few blunders seem to stick out in people's minds. I don't think he is in the same class as Roy or Fuhr, but he's on that next tier, and, like Montreal's Andy Moog, he can elevate his game in the playoffs. Vernon has another run in him before he's through.

Are the Mighty Ducks going to have to trade Paul Kariya or Teemu Selanne to develop the depth of talent they so clearly lack? Also, what do they do about their goalie situation? The Ducks have to be the worst organization in the NHL.
—Jacek Pietrowski, Augsburg, Germany

They definitely won't trade either one of their stars—and they could try to land center Doug Gilmour (New Jersey) as a free agent. Kariya, Gilmour, Selanne—how's that for a superstar line! I don't know if they've given up on goalie Guy Hebert after his poor season, but in any case the most crucial aspect of this team is what you rightly characterize as its lack of overall talent. The Ducks need to land good role players to flesh out the roster. Is GM Jack Ferreira up to that task? He hasn't been in the past.

Send a question to Kostya Kennedy, and check back Friday to read more of his responses.

Previous NHL Playoff Mailbags
April 16: Setting the stage for the scramble
April 21: Reasons to get upset
April 24: No Sabres insurance needed
April 27: Let's not go to the videotape
May 1: Them's fightin' words