The Ying and Yang of P.K Subban

A few years back, my dad and I went to a Toronto Marlies/Hamilton Bulldogs game. I honestly don’t remember too much about the game except for P.K. Subban.

 

It wasn’t that he was everywhere or made some memorable play – although he checked a guy through the glass, which was amazing. No, what I remember most was his presence: when he was on the ice, he just popped out like the message in a magic eye puzzle. It was pretty cool.

 

So I guess I’ve been a fan of him for a while, watching the ups and downs of his short career. And there’s been more than a few: a contract dispute where he missed a few games, a Norris trophy and many, many controversies. See, the thing about Subban is he works people up almost as much as Sean Avery once did. But more than that, Subban is a good player. He’s very good and arguably the best defenseman in the NHL.

 

There are many invalid and moronic reasons he gets so much flak – one’s I’ll leave unsaid because I’m completely unqualified to discuss them – but there’s good ones, too: he occasionally makes a dirty play. I think a good example of both kinds of criticism came into play the other night, during the first game of the Montreal/Ottawa playoff series.

 

I’m going off the top of my head here, but I think there’s been sixty million-plus words written about Subban slashing Mark Stone’s wrist and the immediate backlash. Subban was given the boot, which since it happened so early in the game was effectively a one-game suspension; Stone sustained a micro fracture to his wrist but hasn’t missed either game of the series.

 

The takes came both quickly and hot in the hours after the slash. They ranged from “Subban slash deserved multi-game suspension” to casting doubt on Stone’s injury. Ottawa coach Dave Cameron made a vague threat against the Habs: “when one of their best players gets slashed, just give us five. It’s not that complicated,” he said per a TSN report. That remark’s in poor taste, but given the context, I’m not getting bent out of shape. Indeed, things on Twitter got a little crazier, but that’s the nature of that beast.

 

By the time game two rolled around, I was primed for something crazy: a physical game, one where the Sens crash the net and try to rattle netminder Carey Price or maybe a cheap shot against Subban. It didn’t work out that way, but it ended up as a hell of a game. And again, Subban was the story.

 

If the first game was of the more frustrating side of Subban’s game, the second was one showcasing his positive side. When he was on the ice, he again just popped up over everyone else. Which was a lot, since his 29 minutes of ice time was the most of any Habs skater.

The goal in the second is the lasting impression. It was an amazing shapshot, an absolute beauty from the top of the circle that blew right by Ottawa goalie Andrew Hammond.

 

But there were other moments, too. One that sticks out for me was a late shot where he had the angle but didn’t quite get as much of the puck as he probably would’ve liked and didn’t score. Another is how he was right there on the ice when Alex Galchenyuk scored the OT winner, too.

 

I think the thing with Subban is how he can be frustrating but also exciting. I can’t think of another defenceman I enjoy watching as much as I do Subban, but I can’t think of anyone who generates as much controversy as he does, too. And again, most of it isn’t his fault: I completely believe Subban is held to a different standard and is criticized for things most of the NHL could get away with (ie: he celebrates too much, whatever that means).

 

But there’s certainly a ying and a yang to him. There are going to be games where he’s frustrating and games where he’s exciting. And man, that goal on Friday night. At his best, there’s nobody as exciting as Subban.