Hockey Narrative

Jacques Plante: The Man Who Changed the Face of Hockey, by Todd Denault, details the life of one of the sport’s most colourful and controversial goaltenders. And, just as with any good biography, the book includes far more information than just its main subject. Readers will also learn about the Montreal Canadiens teams of the 1950s and 60s on which Plante played, and many of the all-time greats from those teams.

Jacques Plante was one of the first real renegades in the game. At a time when a players’ union had just come into existence, and  most players were simply happy to have a job, Plante stood up to absurdities and ushered in important changes in the game due to his force of will and refusal to bend to the criticism and mockery of others.

However, this is no hagiography. Denault includes plenty of criticism of Plante as a goalie and a person. Apparently Plante was one of the tightest individuals who ever played the game, and always made himself scarce when it was time to pay the tab in a restaurant or bar. A character trait that is no doubt due to the poverty he experienced as a child, and part of the thorough look into Plante’s life that the book provides.

Fear of Change

Within the story of Plante and the Canadiens of the 1950s, there is the story of human nature, and how people respond to change. It is universal and never-ending in the history of the world: fear of anything new. The ridiculous, illogical resistance offered up by the most frightened individuals of the day and how Plante stands firm in his beliefs result in some of the best passages in the book.  Some things never change. Disciples of Don Cherry, who like their arguments as meaningless as possible, will likely not see themselves in the critics of the past who cringed at the possibility of a NHL goalie donning a mask. However, everyone else with a shred of sanity will see the bloviating blowhard Cherry and all those who cheer him on in the mules of yesteryear who brayed the loudest that a goalie dared to protect himself from 100 mile-an-hour slap shots to the face.

Research and Writing Style

This book represents an impressive effort in research. The reader gets a genuine sense of Plante—both the player and person—and also gets a feel for the Canadiens teams on which Plante played. Most of the research here appears to be from newspaper reports from that time, various hockey books, and TV and radio game replays from the era. Denault also includes some primary research in the form of interviews with surviving players and commentators from the years in which Plante played.

Like many hockey books, the writing style does not dazzle. Call it workmanlike at best. At times, the clichés fly fast and loose. An entire paragraph of clichés is no easy feat to achieve:

With three consecutive Stanley Cups, they stood at the pinnacle of the hockey world, and there appeared to be no end in sight. They had set a standard for winning. However, it was in many ways a double-edged sword. They had cast a tremendous shadow over all those who came after them. Nothing less than a Stanley Cup was acceptable now, for them or those who followed in their footsteps in Montreal.

That, however, is an extreme example. In general, the book is very readable.

There are numerous great hockey factoids, stats, and records sprinkled throughout this book. The game was vastly different back then in many ways.  For example, teams only had one goalie on their roster at any one time. This meant that when a tender went down with an injury in an away game, the opposing team was obliged to supply a backup goalie for the remainder of the game. A  practice goalie usually sat in the stands for the primary purpose of stepping in if the home team’s netminder was hurt, but would also fill in for the visiting goalie as well.

Nostalgia for the Game

While the passages that detail the games are vivid and nostalgic of the game as it was played then, it is  not really evocative of the years in which Plante played the game. Some more colour and reminiscing about life and society outside the rink during those years would have added some entertainment value to the book. But that is a small criticism that will really be a red herring for most readers. The book is pure hockey, which is the reason most people will pick it up in the first place.

This is the first book from author Todd Denault, and it is a decent effort that fans of hockey history will enjoy.

McCown’s Law: The 100 Greatest Hockey Arguments by Bob McCown with David Naylor offers up 100 mini essays on some of the most common and divisive topics that spark  discussion amongst hockey fans. It is one of the most entertaining and enjoyable hockey books that I have read in a long while.

Are all these arguments completely original thoughts put together by McCown and Naylor? I doubt it. Many of the arguments contain ideas I’ve been reading on discussion boards for years. But here they are more fully developed and fleshed out with numerous angles. All synthesized in one location, it makes for very good reading.

Some of the very arguments McCown preaches are ones that I’ve written about in this blog.  Most of these are not arguments in the way that the word normally conveys. They are points of view strongly and convincingly delivered. In the instances where the opposing view on a topic is presented, it is sometimes weak and often veers into straw-man territory. But that doesn’t really matter in a book like this. The entertainment value is in the different angles and the dismissive sneering asides about anyone who would dare to hold an opposing viewpoint.

But McCown also offers up compelling and nuanced arguments on numerous hockey-related topics that you may have never considered before. Like all good analysis, there are plenty of patterns highlighted and underlying rationales plainly and logically explained. In the way that a person who is knowledgeable about a subject makes something seem so eminently obvious that you’re left wondering why the hell you didn’t make the observation yourself. In fact, I can guarantee that within a week or so of reading this book, you will find yourself involved in a hockey debate and repeating McCown’s words. Pray that it is with someone who thinks that Don Cherry is the last word on any hockey discussion.

McCown hammers the moronic non-arguments put forward by many of the mouth breathers who enjoy the sadistic side of the sport. He beautifully rips Cherry on numerous occasions and labels followers of the clown as “Cherry’s disciples.” Not that Cherry or anyone who supports his viewpoints ever offers up a rational or defensible argument, but McCown does such a perfect job of demolishing their absurd claims that they will likely splutter and experience more angst than usual when someone bashes their circular nonsense.

McCown presents a few different types of arguments in the book. Discussions of who was the greatest player (at various positions, during different eras, and of all time) team, and dynasty are some of the best. These are the instances where McCown presents evidence for all sides and then weighs in with his final decision. Discussions about the NHL during different eras rate the competitive and entertainment levels of each. The issues arguments—many of which are about violence or other odd, antiquated aspects of the game— are also very compelling.

And McCown offers interesting perspectives on claims that have become such clichés over the years that no one really stops to consider their validity. For example, in argument number 54, McCown takes on the declaration that “Canada is easily the greatest hockey nation on earth.”  He doesn’t disagree with that statement, but instead explains why Canadians would have to be ashamed if it were any other way.

Consider that for a population of roughly 33 million people, Canada has 3,000 indoor rinks and another 11,100 outdoor rinks. That’s one rink for every 2,357 Canadians. It’s an astounding ratio when you think of it. In fact, we have a lot more rinks per person than we do hospitals.

Second on that list would be the United States with its 2,400 rinks, 2,000 of which are located indoors. On a per-capita basis, you’re talking about one rink for every 123, 000 Americans.

The rest of the world doesn’t even come close. According to the IIHF, Sweden has 445, Finland 253, Russia 145, the Czech Republic has 143 and Slovakia comes at 41—about as many rinks as in Toronto.

…

I won’t dare to suggest that Canada isn’t the greatest hockey nation on Earth. But when you handicap that debate against actual numbers of players and facilities in each country, you could make a pretty good argument that, pound for pound, Slovakia deserves the title.

With 100 arguments, some veer into the filler category. And some of the arguments McCown makes are just plain ridiculous. When he states that the women’s hockey gold medal winner in the Olympics is a foregone conclusion for the foreseeable future, he isn’t wrong. But to suggest that women’s hockey shouldn’t be an Olympic sport until other countries catch up with Canada is not very convincing. That would eliminate incentive for girls and women who play hockey in Canada and would reduce the sport’s visibility elsewhere.

The 100 Greatest Hockey Arguments is written in a straightforward and conversational way that is reminiscent of McCown’s radio broadcasts or a good discussion board rant. Well worth the read for those who love watching, playing, and most importantly, discussing the game of hockey.