I just want to know what people's opinions are of the show or if anyone actually watches it. It seems to me most people on HFboards don't like the Sportsnet hockey panelists.
Mallard the host is unnecessarily confrontational ("Well, you don't have to get pissy about it") and should keep his hockey opinions to himself (he's no analyst). I find him unnecessary in general.
Kypreos is not particularly eloquent (concussion issues from his playing days I guess) and has a chip on his shoulder for having to be a second-fiddle analyst to those on CBC and TSN for so long. I do like his willingness to take the "tough guy" point of view and be politically incorrect about that at times, compared to most analysts.
MacLean is fine when he sticks to just hockey analysis (I'm not saying I always agree with him), but is socially tone-deaf and so often just says mean or cruel things unnecessarily. He's also a very poor listener so often just totally ignores what others say and tries to talk over them.
The others who occasionally appear are usually just boring/average, with the exception of Elliotte Friedman (he's excellent as most know), Glenn Healy (he can be mean but also funny too), and John Shannon (smart and good at giving the "suits" side of things). I don't think Stephen Brunt ever shows up there, but I wish he would.
The show in general does too much rah-rahing interviews with players/coaches who are doing well (those are just boring) and too much coverage of the Leafs (and I'm a Leafs fan).
And as a "partner" of the NHL, that whole network is now too positive towards the NHL, only Bob on Prime Time Sports is relatively immune to that.
A decent show overall, but usually not particularly compelling. If they were more willing to be critical of the NHL it would help a lot.