Dover NASCAR Cup results
Joe Gibbs Racing went first and second with Chase Briscoe placing second.
MORE: Dover results
Alex Bowman finished third and Kyle Larson placed fourth for Hendrick Motorsports. Ty Gibbs completed the top five.
Chase Elliott was sixth. Hendrick Motorsports and Joe Gibbs Racing drivers took the top six spots. Bubba Wallace was seventh.
Dustin Long,
Ty Dillon finished 20th to advance to the finals of the In-Season Challenge next weekend at Indianapolis. Dillon will race against Ty Gibbs for $1 million at Indy after Gibbs eliminated Tyler Reddick.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
NBC Sports
23 minutes ago
- NBC Sports
How to watch Saturday's Xfinity race at Indianapolis: Start time, TV info and weather
Connor Zilisch will aim for his third consecutive Xfinity Series victory Saturday at Indianapolis Motor Speedway. The JR Motorsports driver is coming off back-to-back wins at Sonoma Raceway and Dover Motor Speedway, making him the youngest driver (at 18 years, 11 months and 27 days) to achieve that feat in series history. Zilisch has notched a series-best eight consecutive top-five finishes since missing the May 3 race at Texas Motor Speedway because of a back injury. Also, JR Motorsports seeks to win its 100th career Xfinity race this weekend. With six races remaining in the regular season, Jeb Burton leads his cousin Harrison by seven points for the final provisional spot in the playoffs. Kyle Larson, the defending winner of the Brickyard 400, will be the lone full-time Cup driver entered in Saturday's race (which was won last year by Riley Herbst, who advanced to Cup this season). Dustin Long, Details for Saturday's Xfinity race at Indianapolis (All times Eastern) START: The command to start engines will be given at 4:38 p.m. ... The green flag is scheduled to wave at 4:50 p.m. PRERACE: The Xfinity garage will open at 8 a.m. ... Qualifying will be held at 1 p.m. ... Driver introductions are at 3:50 p.m. ... The national anthem will be performed at 4:31 p.m. by Staff Sergeant (Ret.) Betty White, Indiana National Guard. DISTANCE: The race is 100 laps (250 miles) on the 2.5-mile oval in Indianapolis, Indiana. STAGES: Stage 1 ends at Lap 30. Stage 2 ends at Lap 60. ENTRY LIST: Click here for the 38 cars entered at Indianapolis Motor Speedway. TV/RADIO: CW will broadcast the race starting at 4 p.m. ... SiriusXM NASCAR Radio will have radio coverage. FORECAST: WeatherUnderground — Scattered afternoon thunderstorms with a high near 90 degrees and winds from the south to southwest at 5 to 10 mph and a 40% chance of rain. It's expected to be 87 degrees with a 24% chance of rain at the start of the Xfinity race. LAST TIME: Riley Herbst outdueled Aric Almirola with a pass for the lead in the last corner on July 20, 2024, earning a playoff spot with his first victory of the season.
New York Times
23 minutes ago
- New York Times
Rangers mailbag: Will Panarin extend? Drury's cap usage? Prospect outlooks?
Most of the Rangers have scattered back to their offseason homes this summer, but a group has stuck around the tri-state area. Adam Fox, Matt Rempe, Jonathan Quick and Brett Berard are all doing their summer training at the Prentiss Hockey Performance gym in Stamford, Conn. 'Being together every day, it's been a good bond that we've created,' Berard said Thursday before playing in the Shoulder Check Showcase charity game, which is also in Stamford. 'Lucky to be with those guys. They're all world-class people, world-class players, too. I've learned a lot so far.' Advertisement 'It's all competitive,' Rempe added. 'You've got Quickie in there: he's (39) and still slinging the weights around. It's unreal.' All four of those Rangers participated in the Shoulder Check game — Fox, Berard and Rempe as players, and the veteran Quick as a coach — and Rempe said he's itching for the season to get going again. Speaking before the game, Berard said he suffered a torn labrum last November. He played through the injury but pulled out of the 2025 World Championships to give it time to recover. He said he'll be ready for training camp. Now, let's get into part two of the mailbag. Here's part one from last week, in case you missed it. Some questions have been lightly edited for clarity and length. Are there any examples in the salary cap era of teams doing what the Rangers have done this past year — swapping out 40 percent of the roster and missing the playoffs — who went on to win a Cup within a year or two? — James B. In the cap era (since 2005-06), three teams have missed the playoffs the season right before winning the Stanley Cup: the Golden Knights (2023 champions), the Blues (2019) and the Hurricanes (2006). Two others missed the playoffs two seasons before winning the Stanley Cup: Chicago before winning in 2010 and the Ducks before winning in 2007. I'm going to omit three of those five teams from consideration for your question. Chicago was an up-and-coming team in a wholly different spot than the Rangers, whose playoff miss in 2024-25 came after a stretch of sustained postseason appearances. I'm also going to exclude Peter Laviolette's Hurricanes and Ducks, who won in the two years directly after the salary cap's introduction. During a time of significant change for the NHL, only seven players (minimum 30 games played) who finished the 2003-04 season with Carolina were gone by the start of the 2005-06 season. Anaheim, meanwhile, made the conference final the year after the lockout, so there were three calendar years between it missing the 2003-04 playoffs and winning the Cup in 2007. Advertisement That leaves the Golden Knights and the Blues. Both were consistent playoff teams, then missed the playoffs in disappointing seasons directly before winning the Cup. To add context to your question, 12 of the 22 players (55 percent) who appeared in the 2024 playoffs for the Rangers are now gone. Vegas reached the conference final in 2021 — the year before its postseason miss — and 11 of the Golden Knights' 25 players (44 percent) who played in that playoff run were gone by the start of the 2022-23 season. The Blues won a playoff round in 2017, and nine of the 23 players (39 percent) weren't with the club when its championship season began. There are a couple of interesting similarities between Vegas, St. Louis, and New York: All traded for center upgrades either in the midst of or directly after their respective playoff-less seasons. The Golden Knights got Jack Eichel during the 2021-22 season, the Blues added eventual Conn Smythe winner Ryan O'Reilly before 2018-19 and the Rangers acquired J.T. Miller this past January. The three clubs also all made coaching changes either directly after failing to qualify for the postseason or early in the next season. Most recently, the Rangers hired Mike Sullivan, a two-time Stanley Cup champion, after firing Laviolette immediately after the season. These teams' situations are not parallel, though. Vegas and the Blues had strong groups of defensemen the year they won the Stanley Cup; it's yet to be seen if the Rangers have upgraded enough there after a woeful defensive season in 2024-25. Additionally, St. Louis and Vegas had better seasons than New York did in the years they missed the playoffs. The Blues and Golden Knights each had 94 points in 2017-18 and 2021-22, respectively. The Rangers had nine fewer (85) this past season. Vegas also had rotten injury luck in 2021-22. Alex Tuch — a key part of the trade package for Eichel — didn't play before the deal, and Eichel was coming off neck surgery and played only 34 games for the Golden Knights. Captain Mark Stone, key forward Max Pacioretty and defenseman Alec Martinez all missed more than half the season, and Reilly Smith and William Karlsson both were out at least 15 games. Health circumstances factored into the disappointing Vegas season more than it did with the Rangers, who were relatively healthy in 2024-25. Advertisement Plenty of teams have tried to turn over their rosters quickly and had less-than-historic results. Most Stanley Cup winners in the cap era were consistent playoff teams without exception in the years leading up to their championships. All of that is to warn that just because other teams successfully navigated seemingly similar situations to New York's doesn't mean the Rangers are likely to get the same results. Who leads the Rangers in scoring this year? — Michael B. The safe bet is that Artemi Panarin will lead the team in points. He has done so in each of his six seasons with the club, after all, and has been durable throughout his career. J.T. Miller had 103 points in 2023-24 with Vancouver and 99 in 2021-22, so he could challenge for the team lead. His production returning to that level would be a massive boost for New York. What is the plan past next season, especially with Panarin? Despite the moves made in the past six months, this does not seem like a team ready to compete for the Cup, and with his contract up at the end of next season it was surprising there was no talk or effort to move him. — Kyle B. Panarin, who will turn 34 early in the 2025-26 season, was eligible to sign an extension starting July 1. I asked Chris Drury in July about how much he was prioritizing an extension, but he declined to comment. 'I'm not going to get into private conversations I have with players and agents,' Drury said. 'They are just that to me: private. But as I said in the past, Artemi is a big piece of our team and our organization. We think the world of him as a player and (are) thrilled he is a Ranger.' I would not take that to mean the Rangers don't want to extend Panarin. He's been one of the most productive players in the league since signing a seven-year, $11.64 million average annual contract in 2019. New York has set itself up to have significant cap space next summer (around $29 million, according to PuckPedia). Some of that will have to go to restricted free agents — namely Braden Schneider, who will be due a new deal — but Drury will presumably want to target big-name players. Connor McDavid, Kirill Kaprizov and Eichel are all pending unrestricted free agents, though it's unclear if any of them will actually reach the market. If the Rangers don't even have a chance to bid on one of them — a very real possibility — it will have a whole lot of money to spend, and bringing Panarin back would make total sense from a hockey perspective. Plus, depending on whether Panarin is willing to compromise on AAV, the Rangers could have room for both him and another major addition. There will be other impactful players in next summer's class, even beyond the franchise-altering names. Panarin's age will factor into the Rangers' thinking. Even with its cap space, New York presumably wouldn't risk a high AAV deal with term for someone in his mid-30s. He has yet to show signs of regression, but the older he gets, the more likely that becomes. Advertisement Panarin's name not surfacing in trade rumors should not be a surprise. The Rangers have eyes on returning to contention this season, and it would be hard to do that without their leading scorer. Additionally, the winger has a no-movement clause, so he could block any deal the Rangers tried to complete. Of course, there's more to hockey with Panarin's situation. As The Athletic's Katie Strang reported in April, Panarin and Madison Square Garden Sports — the company that owns the Rangers — paid financial settlements to a Rangers employee last year after she alleged that Panarin sexually assaulted her. The Rangers put out a statement saying only that, 'The matter has been resolved,' and Panarin declined comment when asked multiple times in the aftermath of the report. Adam Fox is too small and possibly the slowest player in the league. The power play was poor last year. Is there an option on the roster to run the power play and limit his minutes? — Curt C. There are certainly other options to quarterback the top power play, but none who would make the team better than if Fox were running it. He didn't have his best season in 2024-25, but he was also better than the general narrative around him seems to suggest. He still had strong underlying numbers, and his even-strength points were actually up from 2023-24 (40 vs. 38). New York is far better with him on the ice than off it. Limiting his minutes is the last thing Sullivan should do. You're correct that the power play struggled this past season. It was a huge difference between the Presidents' Trophy-winning club in 2023-24 and the disappointing one in 2024-25. Fox shares in responsibility for that, but he's not alone. Chris Kreider and Mika Zibanejad had their lowest power play goal outputs since 2016-17, and Panarin's power play production (26 points) was its lowest since the shortened 2020-21 season. Vincent Trocheck went from 24 power play points in 2023-24 to 12. It's also worth noting that, when Fox missed eight games with an upper-body injury late in the season, the power play went an abysmal 2-for-26. That was tied for third worst in the league during that stretch. The power play continued to struggle when Fox returned, but on the year it was much better in games in which he was healthy (19.02 percent success rate in 74 games) than in games in which he wasn't (7.7 percent success rate in eight games). Were the Rangers in on Isaac Howard, who ended up in Edmonton? Second query: We saw a number of prospects make their NHL debuts last season with the Rangers. Are there legitimate others in the pipeline? — John G. The Rangers might have had internal discussions on Howard, the Lightning's 2022 first-round pick, but my sense is they weren't one of the main players for him. The Oilers ended up acquiring him for Sam O'Reilly, their 2024 first-round pick. EJ Emery and newly drafted Malcolm Spence are likely the Rangers' two biggest prospects who haven't debuted, but both are set to play NCAA hockey this season at North Dakota and Michigan, respectively. Neither is in line to play NHL games this year. Advertisement Of the prospects who haven't already played NHL games, goalie Dylan Garand will likely get a look if Igor Shesterkin or Jonathan Quick get hurt. He's coming off a strong year with AHL Hartford and played at World Championships with Team Canada. Adam Sýkora could also be getting close to an NHL debut. Colleague Scott Wheeler ranked him No. 6 in the Rangers' prospect pool in January, and he now has two full AHL seasons under his belt. Perhaps Noah Laba or Carey Terrance get a look this year if the injuries put the Rangers in need of a center, but the team also signed veteran Justin Dowling for organizational depth up the middle. What's the plan with Dylan Garand? — Collin E. Garand, 23, is still a restricted free agent, but there is no concern about whether he and the Rangers will get a deal done, according to a league source. He will still be exempt from waivers this coming season, so New York can assign him to AHL Hartford without any fear of losing him for nothing. He should be the No. 1 there and, as stated last answer, potentially get NHL action depending on injuries. If he has another good year, he could put himself in position to be Shesterkin's full-time backup in 2026-27. Do you see players like Brennan Othmann and Brett Berard eventually becoming long-term Rangers, or are they just young trade bait for a restricted free agent or tradable superstar available within the next year or two? — Robert B. It's too early to say whether Othmann or Berard will be long-time Rangers, considering they have yet to establish themselves as full-time NHLers. Both showed promise last year and should have chances to contend for roster spots at training camp. As for whether they could be trade bait: Berard and Othmann could be add-ins to a trade, but neither would be a centerpiece in a deal for a big-name player. There's a world in which one or both are neither long-timer Rangers or involved in major trades. Will Sullivan give the kids — Gabe Perreault, Brennan Othman, Brett Berard, Scott Morrow and Adam Edström — enough NHL ice time early in the season to prove their worth? Can they all be sent down without being subject to waivers? — Michael K. Sullivan showed a willingness to play young players in Pittsburgh. Matt Murray, Bryan Rust, Olli Määttä and Conor Sheary were among the young players he relied on his first year as Penguins head coach en route to a Stanley Cup. But for Sullivan to trust a young player, he has to earn it, just like everyone else. He stressed in his opening news conference that no Rangers player is entitled to ice time. 'It really is an individualized process,' he said. 'I don't think you can paint every player with the same brush. … Part of the art of coaching is trying to figure out what that daily recipe is that's best for the players. Sometimes it's time in the American League as a young player, sometime it's time in the National League depending on the types of minutes that player can play.' It's imperative for developing players to get reps, so if those players are regular scratches, they probably should go down to AHL Hartford for more consistent playing time. Edström is the only one you listed who would require waivers; the others can be sent to the Wolf Pack without risk of losing them to a claim by another team. Why can't Drury seem to keep the cap manageable? Are we doomed to be in a perpetual cap crunch with him as general manager? Seems like we are in a cap crunch, then he pulls a rabbit out of his hat and then six months later we are still in a cap crunch. He seems to be better at shedding cap than using it wisely. — Ptlaino Some of this is the reality of being a salary cap team. General managers around the league are constantly trying to figure out ways to keep their cap sheets under the upper limit. Advertisement Your critique of his use of cap space is fair. It's impossible to know what the market would have been for some pending unrestricted free agents or restricted free agents, but some of the contracts Drury gave out after trading Jacob Trouba were a bit head-scratching, considering how much every bit of cap flexibility matters. Could he have saved some room on the extensions for Juuso Pärssinen (two years, $1.25 million AAV), Urho Vaakanainen (two years, $1.55 million AAV) and Will Borgen (five years, $4.1 million AAV)? Possibly, though perhaps not on Borgen, given what other defensemen got on the open market this summer. Taking Carson Soucy's $3.25 million cap hit ahead of last deadline could also age poorly if the defenseman doesn't bounce back to 2023-24 form. Saving $100,000 here and there can add up to the ability to sign a role player. Drury might have limited himself a bit in that regard. He did, however, negotiate a good deal on the Vladislav Gavrikov free agent contract. The former Kings' defenseman — who had elite shutdown numbers this past season — almost certainly could've netted more in free agency than the seven year, $7 million AAV deal he got from the Rangers. As mentioned earlier, the Rangers will have significant cap space after the 2025-26 season. How Drury manages to use it will greatly impact the team's ceiling in the coming years.
New York Times
an hour ago
- New York Times
Getting a new CBA without a lockout is bad, actually: The Contrarian returns
It's late July, we're two months away from games that matter, and NHL GMs have apparently taken the rest of the summer off. Let's get Contrarian. This is the feature where you send in your most obvious takes, and I tell you that you're wrong, whether I believe it or not. In the past, we've made the case that Mark Messier was a great Canuck, Ray Bourque's Cup win was bad, but Brett Hull's crease goal was good and Bobby Orr's flying goal photo is overrated. Last time, we made the case for Alex Ovechkin being an overrated bum, and also for Alex Ovechkin being an underrated legend, because we're flexible like that. Advertisement This time, we've got a new CBA, an old legend and everything in between. Let's dive in. Note: Submissions have been edited for clarity and style. The NHL and NHLPA agreeing on a new CBA quickly and without any work-stoppage drama is a good thing. — Kevin S. On the contrary, Kevin S., you twit. Unless, of course, you're an owner. Are you an owner, Kevin? Are you? Because if not, you should be concerned about what we just saw play out. We had the two sides of this multibillion-dollar industry come together, and the result was a one-sided victory for the owners, one that appeared to come with next to no resistance from the players. Sure, they got a few minor concessions in the form of payroll taxes and an increased playoff fund. But in today's NHL, those 'wins' represent pennies on the dollar. Meanwhile, the owners got more games, shorter contracts and smaller bonuses. And they'll keep all the coming expansion money, a multibillion-dollar windfall that the players didn't even seem to try to get a piece of. And sure, you can see why it played out that way. After all, this is Gary Bettman's NHL, where history shows us how these things usually go. If the players try to stand up for themselves, even a little, Bettman shuts everything down. Sometimes the players win, sometimes they lose, and sometimes nobody's even sure, but it always comes with a cost in a league where careers are short. When it comes to work stoppages, Bettman isn't bluffing. He's proven that over the years. So why even try? The position was summed up perfectly by a player quoted in this excellent piece. 'What can we do? There can't be another lockout,' the player said. 'Those don't go our way. It's better to get it done.' 'What can we do?' indeed. That's rational, on some level. But it's not healthy. And it's not fair to the players, who are the reason we watch this league. Nobody thinks that Marty Walsh should have come in with guns blazing, trying to recreate the animosity of the Bob Goodenow era. But if this were a hockey fight, it sure looks like the owners wiggled their gloves and the players immediately turtled. Advertisement After three decades of Bettman's 'shut it down' approach, we now have labor peace. But that peace apparently just means the players roll over without any sign of a fight, while the owners tilt the ice even further at every opportunity. That's good news for fans who just wanted to watch hockey without hearing from the accountants and mediators. But it's not a good thing for the game. The 4 Nations Face-Off was an overwhelming success for the NHL. — James On the contrary, James, you clodpoll. Was it fun? Of course. Did it blow away expectations? I'd say so. Did the best team win? Indisputably. But that last bit is the problem. You're talking about what's best for the NHL. And when it comes to best-on-best tournaments, here's what's best for the NHL: Team USA finally winning one of these things. That's it. That's what needs to happen. If you could hook Bettman and friends and up to lie detectors, they'd tell you that's the whole point. From the league's perspective, shutting down a season for a best-on-best showdown is ultimately a marketing exercise. And when it comes to marketing this sport in the USA, only one result moves the needle. And Team Canada winning — again, like they always do — isn't it. Short of a Team USA win, this year's tournament delivered everything you could ask for, including a signature moment: The infamous Nine Seconds from the round robin, the rare hockey game that seemed to take over the sports discourse for days. Fans of other sports were hooked because what they were watching didn't look anything like the leagues they were used to. Unfortunately, it didn't look much like the modern NHL either, meaning that wild night in Montreal couldn't draw in new fans on its own. The tournament needed the right outcome, and it didn't get it. American sports fans will dip in to sample best-on-best hockey, as the record ratings for the 4 Nations final show. But they want to see a happy ending. They didn't get it this year, just like they didn't in 2002 or 2010 or any other year beyond 1996, which is too long ago to matter. And that's why they don't stick around. Less than four months later, we got a Stanley Cup Final featuring a rematch between Connor McDavid, who scored the OT winner, and Matthew Tkachuk, who worked hard to make himself the face of Team USA. Nobody watched. Advertisement (Well, they watched in Canada, as they always do. But the NHL has been clear over the years: When it comes to Canada, the only priority is to cash as big a check as possible from Sportsnet every decade or so. Beyond that, they couldn't care less.) The bottom line: There's a reason that the typical American sports fan still thinks a round-robin upset from 1980 is the most important hockey game ever played. Until a Team USA can deliver that sort of moment again, nothing is going to be a 'success' for the NHL, in any way that matters to league leadership. American players can keep kicking the can down the road, always telling us that the next tournament is the one that matters. But eventually, they're going to need to do more than talk a good game. The decentralized draft was awful, and the GMs of this league proved their incompetence by voting for its return. — Jackson S. On the contrary, Jackson, you dumbbell. I mean, you're right about the first part — the decentralized draft that we all watched a few weeks ago was, indeed, awful. I wrote that at the time, and not many of you disagreed. But was it awful because it was a decentralized draft? Or was it awful because it was the first decentralized draft (of the modern era, that wasn't forced on us by a pandemic)? Or did the NHL just try a few things that didn't work, in a way they can learn from and fix for next year's edition? The answer is we don't know. But we'll find out, because they're doing it again next year. That's upset some fans, especially the kind of whiny babies who never like anything. But the reality is that we had decades of centralized drafts and one year of the alternative. We can't know if the new way can work. All we know is that it didn't, once. The league deserves a chance to ditch the cringey Zoom interviews, figure out a way to speed things along and try again. If that one stinks, then fine, attack the GMs if they insist on sticking with it. Just not yet. Comment sections are trash. — Paul W. On the contrary, Paul, you (tries to think of the most insulting label possible), commenter. Comment sections can be great … sometimes. If I had to guess, I'd bet that 90 percent of the commenters on a typical post of mine are pretty cool, even if they don't agree with what they've just read. Of course, that number can get a lot higher depending on whose post it is and what the subject matter might be. I generally get to play on easy mode, because how fired up can you really get over stuff like this? I've seen some really interesting discussions break out in my comment sections, not to mention having some really neat suggestions for future posts. Advertisement But it doesn't take much to ruin the vibe, even if 90 percent of people are cool — nobody's fine with 10 percent turd content in their punchbowl. And yeah, some of you are just weird. That includes the garden variety trolls and those who've made a permanent state of grievance into their whole personality. It also includes some sports- and hockey-specific types, like the super-homers, or the 'slow news day?' slugs, or the Leaf-pilled anti-fans who make everything about one team and then complain about it, or the single-issue obsessives, or the stick-to-sports losers, or Bruins fans. It is what it is. So what can you do? Not much, unfortunately. You can ignore the troll, upvote the first guy telling them they're an idiot, and then move on. (Piling on in the same thread just makes it look like that comment is the most important one on the piece.) Other than that, just be cool, remind yourself that we're talking about a game here, and remember that sometimes it's OK to just not post anything. That story about the Oilers learning how to win from the Islanders in 1983 is one of hockey's best. — Sean M. On the contrary, Sean, you … wait, this is me. I'm submitting my own questions. That's kind of pathetic, but in my defense, I basically asked you guys to send this one in a few weeks ago and nobody took the bait. So yeah, on the contrary, Sean, you absolute beauty. The Oilers/Islanders story is bad, and we need to stop bringing it up every year at playoff time. If you've somehow missed it, the story goes like this: It's 1983 and the upstart young Oilers are facing the Islanders in the Stanley Cup Final. They're the better team, in terms of regular-season record, and have all the pieces in place. But the Islanders are a dynasty, having won three straight Cups. Sure enough, the Isles sweep the series. After the deciding game, various Oilers players (including Wayne Gretzky and Mark Messier in most tellings) walk by New York's dressing room, expecting to see a raucous celebration. Instead, they see a bunch of beaten-up players with ice packs, barely celebrating at all because of how much they've left on the ice. At that moment, the Oilers finally understand what it takes to be a winner, and they go on to beat those same Islanders one year later for the first of five Cups in seven years. Here's Gretzky himself spinning the tale: It's an awesome story. You can see why fans love it. It's also completely fake. I mean, come on. Let's use some common sense. We're supposed to believe that the Islanders have just won the Stanley Cup, and they're all sitting in their locker room with the door open for some reason. Nobody's celebrating. Nobody's happy. They're just all strapping ice packs to their broken limbs or whatever, not even so much as cracking a beer, even though just a few minutes earlier they looked like this. Advertisement You're buying that? Really? Because if so, I'm inviting you over to play the new Super Mario that I got from my uncle, who works at Nintendo. Now, does this mean I'm calling Gretzky a liar? Not necessarily. He's not a historian, he's a storyteller, and he's going back 40-plus years for this one. He's not making things up out of nothing. I don't doubt that he may have walked past that room, and maybe things weren't as boisterous as he expected. He's just exaggerating, being dramatic and shaping a story over the decades in a way that plays best. But what he's describing didn't happen that way. And if you don't believe me, why not ask somebody who was there: Islanders' legend Bryan Trottier. He was on a podcast a few months ago and mentioned the legend of the quiet dressing room. He says it's not true, or at least not accurate, the way Gretzky tells it. 'That's not the way we remember it,' he says. Instead, he says that somebody told the Islanders players when the Oilers were on their way past the room, so they quieted down the ongoing celebration out of respect for their opponent, not wanting to seem like they were rubbing it in. But they were celebrating. Of course they were. They'd just won the Stanley Cup! That version makes sense, and squares with where Gretzky (and others) got this idea in the first place. But over the years, it's morphed into the Islanders' post-Cup room being a morgue. That's not true, it was never true, and it's not a good lesson about how to win. When you achieve a lifelong dream, you absolutely should celebrate. And the Islanders did. You know who else did? The Oilers! If the story had really played out the way the modern version does, and was so instrumental to Edmonton learning how to win, shouldn't their celebrations have been muted? Instead, this is the team that invented the Cup handoffs and team photos and maybe did some other things. Does that sound like a team that had learned that the key to winning was being too beat up to be happy about it? No, because that never happened. Let's stop pretending it did. If you'd like to submit a take for future editions of The Contrarian, you can do that here. (Photo of Islanders' Bryan Trottier hoisting the Stanley Cup in 1983: Bruce Bennett Studios via Getty Images Studios / Getty Images)
