Well, it's no secret that I'm not a big fan of ESPN.com hockey columnist Scott Burnside. We've had our differences in the past.
I know my scorn and distaste for him weighs heavy on Mr. Burnside's soul. I know he lies awake at night. I know he cries.
In what can only be considered a desperate plea for my forgiveness, Burnside posted something actually worth reading on Monday, and it's nothing less than a bold defense of low-scoring playoff hockey. Whodathunkit?
Now, hands up for those who saw the New York Rangers and Buffalo Sabres play three straight 2-1 games, two of which went to overtime in the second round. Drama? Oh yeah -- Chris Drury's tying goal with 7.7 seconds left in Game 5, and the overtime power plays and chances. Think anyone in Madison Square Garden or in HSBC Center cared there were nine goals scored over the course of those three games? No. Only writers, it appears, who unfortunately perpetuate the myth that more goals mean more excitement and fewer goals mean an inferior product.
Um, one thing, Mr. Burnside. It seems that one of those writers that has "perpetuated the myth" that more goals should be scored in order to improve the game is you.
Even in his best effort to get on my good side, Burnside blows it. Such is life.