In recent seasons, every game between the Boston Bruins and Tampa Bay Lightning seemed bigger than most others, as the two have been perennial powerhouses in the Eastern Conference. Tuesday night's matchup was no exception, and the Bruins' 2-1 win opened up their lead in the Atlantic Division to nine points over the Lightning. First place in the Atlantic is important, as it includes a first-round matchup in the Stanley Cup Playoffs against a wild card, as opposed to the dangerous Toronto Maple Leafs.

Here's where things stand throughout the league heading into Wednesday's four-game slate, including Arizona Coyotes-Vancouver Canucks streaming live on ESPN+.

Note: Playoff chances are courtesy of Money Puck, while tragic numbers are per the NHL's Damian Echevarrieta.

Jump to:
Eastern standings | Western standings
Race for No. 1 pick | Current playoff matchups

Eastern Conference

Boston Bruins

Points: 96
Regulation wins: 37
Playoff position: Atlantic 1
Games left: 15 (7 home, 8 away)
Next game: March 5: @ FLA
Playoff chances: 100%
Tragic number: N/A

Tampa Bay Lightning

Points: 87
Regulation wins: 33
Playoff position: Atlantic 2
Games left: 16 (8 home, 8 away)
Next game: March 5: vs. MTL
Playoff chances: 100%
Tragic number: N/A

Toronto Maple Leafs

Points: 78
Regulation wins: 27
Playoff position: Atlantic 3
Games left: 15 (8 home, 7 away)
Next game: March 5: @ LA
Playoff chances: 85.6%
Tragic number: N/A

Washington Capitals

Points: 86
Regulation wins: 30
Playoff position: Metro 1
Games left: 17 (9 home, 8 away)
Next game: March 4: vs. PHI
Playoff chances: 99.8%
Tragic number: N/A

Philadelphia Flyers

Points: 83
Regulation wins: 28
Playoff position: Metro 2
Games left: 17 (9 home, 8 away)
Next game: March 4: @ WSH
Playoff chances: 99.2%
Tragic number: N/A

Pittsburgh Penguins

Points: 82
Regulation wins: 27
Playoff position: Metro 3
Games left: 17 (8 home, 9 away)
Next game: March 5: @ BUF
Playoff chances: 90.0%
Tragic number: N/A

New York Islanders

Points: 78
Regulation wins: 24
Playoff position: Wild card 1
Games left: 17 (7 home, 10 away)
Next game: March 5: @ OTT
Playoff chances: 61.3%
Tragic number: N/A

Columbus Blue Jackets

Points: 78
Regulation wins: 24
Playoff position: Wild card 2
Games left: 15 (5 home, 10 away)
Next game: March 4: @ CGY
Playoff chances: 41.7%
Tragic number: N/A

Carolina Hurricanes

Points: 75
Regulation wins: 25
Playoff position: N/A
Games left: 18 (8 home, 10 away)
Next game: March 5: @ PHI
Playoff chances: 70.9%
Tragic number: 34

New York Rangers

Points: 74
Regulation wins: 30
Playoff position: N/A
Games left: 16 (7 home, 9 away)
Next game: March 5: vs. WSH
Playoff chances: 25.3%
Tragic number: 29

Florida Panthers

Points: 73
Regulation wins: 28
Playoff position: N/A
Games left: 16 (8 home, 8 away)
Next game: March 5: vs. BOS
Playoff chances: 20.0%
Tragic number: 28

Montreal Canadiens

Points: 71
Regulation wins: 19
Playoff position: N/A
Games left: 14 (5 home, 9 away)
Next game: March 5: @ TB
Playoff chances: 5.8%
Tragic number: 22

Buffalo Sabres

Points: 66
Regulation wins: 22
Playoff position: N/A
Games left: 16 (8 home, 8 away)
Next game: March 5: vs. PIT
Playoff chances: 0.2%
Tragic number: 21

New Jersey Devils

Points: 64
Regulation wins: 20
Playoff position: N/A
Games left: 16 (9 home, 7 away)
Next game: March 6: vs. STL
Playoff chances: 0.1%
Tragic number: 19

Ottawa Senators

Points: 58
Regulation wins: 17
Playoff position: N/A
Games left: 15 (5 home, 10 away)
Next game: March 5: vs. NYI
Playoff chances: 0%
Tragic number: 11

Detroit Red Wings

Points: 35
Regulation wins: 12
Playoff position: N/A
Games left: 14 (7 home, 7 away)
Next game: March 6: vs. CHI
Playoff chances: 0%
Tragic number: Eliminated

Western Conference

St. Louis Blues

Points: 90
Regulation wins: 31
Playoff position: Central 1
Games left: 15 (7 home, 8 away)
Next game: March 6: @ NJ
Playoff chances: 100%
Tragic number: N/A

Colorado Avalanche

Points: 87
Regulation wins: 36
Playoff position: Central 2
Games left: 17 (10 home, 7 away)
Next game: March 4: vs. ANA
Playoff chances: 100%
Tragic number: N/A

Dallas Stars

Points: 82
Regulation wins: 26
Playoff position: Central 3
Games left: 16 (9 home, 7 away)
Next game: March 5: @ NSH
Playoff chances: 99.1%
Tragic number: N/A

Vegas Golden Knights

Points: 82
Regulation wins: 29
Playoff position: Pacific 1
Games left: 14 (4 home, 10 away)
Next game: March 6: @ WPG
Playoff chances: 98.7%
Tragic number: N/A

Edmonton Oilers

Points: 80
Regulation wins: 30
Playoff position: Pacific 2
Games left: 16 (10 home, 5 away)
Next game: March 5: @ CHI
Playoff chances: 95.9%
Tragic number: N/A

Calgary Flames

Points: 75
Regulation wins: 24
Playoff position: Pacific 3
Games left: 15 (11 home, 4 away)
Next game: March 4: vs. CBJ
Playoff chances: 79.6%
Tragic number: N/A

Vancouver Canucks

Points: 74
Regulation wins: 26
Playoff position: Wild card 1
Games left: 17 (10 home, 7 away)
Next game: March 4: vs. ARI
Playoff chances: 61.1%
Tragic number: N/A

Winnipeg Jets

Points: 74
Regulation wins: 27
Playoff position: Wild card 2
Games left: 14 (6 home, 8 away)
Next game: March 6: vs. VGS
Playoff chances: 25.5%
Tragic number: N/A

Minnesota Wild

Points: 73
Regulation wins: 29
Playoff position: N/A
Games left: 16 (6 home, 10 away)
Next game: March 5: @ SJ
Playoff chances: 66.6%
Tragic number: 32

Nashville Predators

Points: 72
Regulation wins: 25
Playoff position: N/A
Games left: 16 (7 home, 9 away)
Next game: March 5: vs. DAL
Playoff chances: 29.0%
Tragic number: 31

Arizona Coyotes

Points: 72
Regulation wins: 25
Playoff position: N/A
Games left: 15 (8 home, 7 away)
Next game: March 4: @ VAN
Playoff chances: 33.3%
Tragic number: 29

Chicago Blackhawks

Points: 68
Regulation wins: 21
Playoff position: N/A
Games left: 16 (10 home, 6 away)
Next game: March 5: vs. EDM
Playoff chances: 10.9%
Tragic number: 27

San Jose Sharks

Points: 62
Regulation wins: 22
Playoff position: N/A
Games left: 16 (8 home, 8 away)
Next game: March 5: vs. MIN
Playoff chances: 0.3%
Tragic number: 21

Anaheim Ducks

Points: 60
Regulation wins: 18
Playoff position: N/A
Games left: 16 (9 home, 7 away)
Next game: March 4: @ COL
Playoff chances: 0%
Tragic number: 19

Los Angeles Kings

Points: 56
Regulation wins: 18
Playoff position: N/A
Games left: 16 (11 home, 5 away)
Next game: March 5: vs. TOR
Playoff chances: 0%
Tragic number: 15

Race for the No. 1 pick

The NHL uses a draft lottery to determine the order at the top of the first round, so the team that finishes in last place is not guaranteed the No. 1 selection. However, whoever does win the draft lottery has a chance to select Alexis Lafreniere.

Find out more about Lafreniere here, read up on the rest of the top draft prospects here, and check out all of our 2020 NHL draft coverage.

Detroit Red Wings

Points: 35
Regulation wins: 12
Chance of No. 1 pick: 18.5%

Los Angeles Kings

Points: 56
Regulation wins: 18
Chance of No. 1 pick: 13.5%

Ottawa Senators

Points: 58
Regulation wins: 17
Chance of No. 1 pick: 11.5%

Anaheim Ducks

Points: 60
Regulation wins: 18
Chance of No. 1 pick: 9.5%

San Jose Sharks

Note: Pick belongs to Ottawa.

Points: 62
Regulation wins: 22
Chance of No. 1 pick: 8.5%

New Jersey Devils

Points: 64
Regulation wins: 20
Chance of No. 1 pick: 7.5%

Buffalo Sabres

Points: 66
Regulation wins: 22
Chance of No. 1 pick: 6.5%

Chicago Blackhawks

Points: 68
Regulation wins: 21
Chance of No. 1 pick: 6%

Montreal Canadiens

Points: 71
Regulation wins: 19
Chance of No. 1 pick: 5%

Arizona Coyotes

Points: 72
Regulation wins: 25
Chance of No. 1 pick: 3.5%

Florida Panthers

Points: 73
Regulation wins: 28
Chance of No. 1 pick: 3%

Minnesota Wild

Points: 73
Regulation wins: 29
Chance of No. 1 pick: 2.5%

Vancouver Canucks

Points: 74
Regulation wins: 26
Chance of No. 1 pick: 2%

New York Rangers

Points: 74
Regulation wins: 30
Chance of No. 1 pick: 1.5%

Carolina Hurricanes

Points: 75
Regulation wins: 25
Chance of No. 1 pick: 1%

Current playoff matchups

(A1) Bruins vs. (WC2) Blue Jackets
(A2) Lightning vs. (A3) Maple Leafs
(M1) Capitals vs. (WC1) Islanders
(M2) Flyers vs. (M3) Penguins
(P1) Golden Knights vs. (WC1) Canucks
(P2) Oilers vs. (P3) Flames
(C1) Blues vs. (WC2) Jets
(C2) Avalanche vs. (C3) Stars

The Tampa Bay Lightning are once again among the wagering favorites for the 2020 Stanley Cup. Which must be comforting, given they're only a few months removed from critics wondering if coach Jon Cooper should be fired and whether their first-round sweep at the hands of the Columbus Blue Jackets last spring had irreparably damaged their collective psyche.

What the Lightning have done since that early stumble this season has reaffirmed them as contender for the championship that has eluded this group through three trips to the Eastern Conference finals and one loss in the Stanley Cup Final. Their stars were shining. Their much-discussed refocusing on defense was producing results. And that was before general manager Julien BriseBois aggressively anted up two first-round picks at the trade deadline for forwards Barclay Goodrow and Blake Coleman.

How did they turn their season around? How does this current roll compare to last season's historic, regular-season juggernaut? And what does it all mean for their push for the Cup this postseason?

Note: Data in the story is from Natural Stat Trick, and as of the games of March 2, unless otherwise specified.

I. How did they flip the switch?

Two months into this season, the Lightning were anything but the Lightning. A loss at home to Carolina on Nov. 30 dropped them to sixth in their division, with a plus-9 goal differential and with their record at 12-9-3 on the season.

The previous season up to Nov. 30? They were 18-7-1, in first place and had a plus-23 goal differential.

Fast-forward to Dec. 23, 2019. The Lightning had been trending upward a bit, but from this 6-1 victory over the Florida Panthers onward, it was like the entire team snagged a power-up in a game of Mario Kart; the Lightning were suddenly lapping the field. The Lightning went 24-6-1 over their next 31 games, for a .790 points percentage, the best in the NHL during that stretch. They scored 112 goals and surrendered 73, the best goal differential in the league in that span.

They were the Lightning again.

So what changed?

Their offense rose from 3.47 goals per game in their first 34 games to 3.61 in their next 31 games. That's not a mighty leap forward, but a significant uptick when you consider who was scoring those goals during the Lightning's turnaround. Nikita Kucherov had 12 goals and a 1.12 points-per-game average in his first 33 games, and then he recaptured that Hart Trophy form: 19 goals in 30 games with a 1.43 points-per-game average. Steven Stamkos, currently injured, went from a points-per-game average of 0.96 in his first 31 games to 1.38 points per game in his next 26. Brayden Point went from a 0.84 points per game to 1.13 during the Lightning's resurgence. And so on.

But it's the defense that really turned things around for Tampa. That was an underrated hallmark of their incredible 2019-20 season: The Lightning were seventh in goals-against average (2.70). Their first 34 games this season didn't look anything like that, with a 3.23 goals-against average; from Dec. 23 on, their goals-against average was a stellar 2.36.

Diving into the numbers, we discover that the Lightning's 5-on-5 defense wasn't that terrible during their early-season slump. They were seventh in expected goals against per 60 minutes (2.12) but were seeing different results, at 2.57 goals against per 60, which was 21st in the league. But when the switch was flipped ... wow. The Lightning had an expected goals against per 60 minutes of 1.97, and a goals against of 1.95 per 60 minutes.

The two main catalysts for this defensive turnaround are somewhat intertwined. The first is their penalty kill, which went from 7.24 goals against per 60 minutes during the slow start down to 5.99 during their post-Dec. 23 roll.

The second is their 5-on-5 save percentage, which was .915 through the first 33 games of the season -- one reason why the Lightning were giving up more goals than their play would expectedly yield -- and jumped to .932 through the next 31 games.

This all tracks back to last season's Vezina Trophy winner, Andrei Vasilevskiy. His first 25 games of the season yielded a .906 save percentage and a 2.88 goals-against average. In the next 23 games -- during which he had an absurd 19-3-1 record -- Vasilevskiy had a .923 save percentage and a 2.34 goals-against average.

(Backup Curtis McElhinney also got his act together after a sub-.900 start, with a .921 save percentage and a 2.13 goals-against average in nine games.)

The Lightning are best known for their offensive weaponry, and their star players certainly helped spark this dominant stretch. But when the switch flipped, it was their defense that powered it.

"Sometimes you just gotta play the simple game," said Cooper after a Feb. 13 win against Edmonton. "Two [goals] or less, you're giving yourself a chance to win the game. Three or more ... you don't want to be in a situation where you have to score your way out of games. You have to defend to win games. And I think that's something our guys have attached themselves to and take pride in. It's something we've been working on from training camp on. I know it wasn't pretty early on, but you have to go through some growing pains. But it's clicking now for us."

II. How do they compare to last season?

It almost seems blasphemous to suggest that this season's version of the Lightning is superior to the one that won 62 games, outscored their opponents by nearly 100 goals, and might as well have swept the individual awards last season. But this version of the Lightning objectively looks like the superior version, from the personnel they have available to the underlying performance indicators themselves.

The full-season numbers do them a disservice because of a variety of extenuating circumstances. Their schedule was thrown off by an early November trip to Europe, they were lagging behind in games played for a long period of time because of it, and they uncharacteristically couldn't buy a save from Andrei Vasilevskiy.

There's also something to the idea that they came out of the gate in a bit of malaise after last year's abrupt finish, with everyone watching very closely to see whether they'd be able to regroup. Every single loss or underwhelming performance was microanalyzed for clues to suggest that something was fundamentally wrong. Put all of that together, and you get results that didn't line up with expectations, or their talent level:

• 6-4-2 record, minus-1 goal differential in October

• 6-5-1 record, plus-9 goal differential in November

• 5-4-1 record, minus-1 goal differential to start December

Since that holiday break, it's been an entirely different story. They've been on a complete rampage, not only beating opponents, but throttling them in trademark fashion:

• 24-6-1 record

• 111-73 goal differential in all situations

• 80-47 goal differential at 5-on-5

They've had a recent stretch of uneven play, but that will happen over the course of an 82-game season. What's most important for the Lightning is that the data is all there to suggest they're as dominant as ever in the areas that count most. They've gone from (really) good to great at 5-on-5, establishing themselves as more of an even-strength juggernaut than they were while compiling all of those regular-season wins last season.

They're sporting a 54.4% shot share, 56.6% high-danger chance share and 56.7% expected goal share. That's significant for their future success, especially as they approach the postseason, where we know officiating patterns change and when the opportunities and ability to bank easy power-play goals dry up against better competition.

From a personnel perspective, there's no argument against this version being better than last season's, assuming full health, which is admittedly a big assumption right now considering that Steven Stamkos and Ryan McDonagh are both out for extended periods of time.

Losing J.T. Miller hurts, considering how much he has spread his wings in Vancouver this season, but he was seventh in 5-on-5 usage and ninth in total ice time among Lightning forwards last season, making him more of a luxury item than foundation piece. They've ostensibly replaced him, Anton Stralman (who isn't what he once was), Dan Girardi (who is no longer playing in the league) and Ryan Callahan (whose body no longer allows him to play) with Kevin Shattenkirk, Blake Coleman, Patrick Maroon and Barclay Goodrow.

But the biggest development has been the internal improvement of their young players, with Anthony Cirelli and Mikhail Sergachev each taking gigantic leaps in their development. Cirelli has vaulted himself from being a nice, young, complementary player to a legitimate Selke Trophy contender with his play at both ends of the ice.

Having Cirelli able to jump up from playing 11:13 per game at 5-on-5 and 14:51 overall to 13:24 and 18:29, respectively, has opened doors for Jon Cooper. Not only has Cirelli handled the added responsibility and workload against the other team's best players, but he has afforded the team the ability to load up its best offensive players as a three-headed, scoring monster without fear of what'll happen when they're not on the ice.

Similar to where we were with the Washington Capitals before they eventually got over the hump and won a title, we've reached a crossroads with the Lightning where no one really wants to hear about how good they've been in the regular season or what they've accomplished. But we are certainly witnessing one of the most impressive teams in recent history.

III. Have they changed/learned anything from their playoff failure?

It's interesting looking back at the blueprint we laid out for how they could be beaten in a series last spring, because the Blue Jackets checked every single one of those boxes. They slowed the pace of the game, they were incredibly disciplined (giving the Lightning just 10 total power-play minutes in four games), they had good depth without any real weak links in the lineup and their goalie was at the top of his game.

That can be viewed as an oversimplification of where things went wrong last postseason, because no one at the time was predicting the way it would ultimately unfold, but it also serves as a cruel reminder of the unforgiving nature of the NHL playoffs. No matter what you accomplish over the course of 82 games and six months, all it takes is one bad week for your season to be over.

The most admirable thing Julien BriseBois and the Lightning have done is to avoid making reactionary moves, thinking with their heads instead of their hearts. The postseason can be about psychological warfare as much as physical, especially after the fact. We've seen plenty of strong teams make changes just for the sake of making changes after things went wrong, only to wind up regretting it. Allowing postseason failure to control your decision-making will push your team away from what made it special in the first place.

The Lightning haven't really changed, and didn't need to, because they were good at hockey and still are. Instead, they've tinkered on the margins, experimented with different combinations and added players to their supporting cast that can seamlessly mesh with their ethos as a team. If anything, they've doubled down on speed and skill, using those characteristics to grind their opponents down and change the way we think about what constitutes being "difficult to play against."

That's most evident in their penalty kill, which is now armed with relentless attackers who try to negate power plays by making them defend, as opposed to having penalty killers sit back in a shell, as is tradition. Playing against Anthony Cirelli and Blake Coleman when you're up a man doesn't look like it's especially fun, with all of the time and space you would've relished disappearing. That type of aggression will be vital, considering Tampa Bay's likely playoff road map this year, which includes the Maple Leafs and Bruins in the first two rounds, with either the Penguins or Capitals potentially waiting in the Eastern Conference finals.

We tend to think of the Lightning as an offensive team. This makes sense because they score a lot of goals and have a number of highly gifted stars. But they also give up the third-lowest rate of expected goals at 5-on-5, and sixth fewest overall. They also give up the fourth-lowest rate of high-danger chances at 5-on-5, and fifth-fewest across all situations, with nearly identical rates to a Bruins team that is widely considered to be one of the stingiest defensive clubs in the league. And Andrei Vasilevskiy's struggles relative to the high standards he has set for himself are partially responsible for that.

His minus-13.2 goals saved above expected are nearly identical to Sergei Bobrovsky's minus-13.5 for the season, yet Vasilevsky hasn't been scrutinized nearly as heavily because his .913 raw save percentage is decent, and he wins games playing behind a better team. There's no goalie in the league more physically gifted, and it's unlikely that Vasilevskiy suddenly forgot how to stop pucks at the age of 25, just one year removed from a Vezina Trophy. The sooner he starts playing his best, the better for a Lightning team that's doing everything they can to make life easier for him. Beyond that, there's no reason to believe the Lightning are not reliable enough defensively for playoff hockey, for the crowd that values that sort of thing as a benchmark for success this time of the season.

IV. So what does this mean for the playoffs?

Watching Cooper and his players attempt to rationalize their sweep at the hands of Columbus was excruciating. It was like trying to diagnose why a satellite fell to earth after a total systems failure.

"It's tough to pinpoint one thing," defenseman Ryan McDonagh said. "We hurt ourselves in a lot of different fashions. Strengths that were keys to us winning in the regular season didn't get it done in this series. They won all of those categories."

There are some things the Lightning can correct, and have addressed, before this postseason:

They have to earn more power-play chances than the six they were given in four games, converting once.

Adding Coleman and Goodrow will further bolster a penalty kill that was already in the top 10 this season, and that's essential for the postseason. The Blue Jackets' power play morphed into the mid-1970s Montreal Canadiens, whipping the puck around with constant motion. They finished 5-for-10 in the series. That obviously can't happen again.

They can correct their discipline. Kucherov collected the Hart Trophy for league MVP two months after he missed Game 3 while serving a one-game suspension for boarding Jackets defenseman Markus Nutivaara. That's inexcusable.

They can correct their offensive approach. It was obvious from the way the Lightning played that a team with an effective forechecking game could slow the offensive juggernaut to a crawl. That's what happened. So the hope is that the Lightning learn to change up their offensive approach. Bringing in Maroon, the big rig who throws his body around behind the goal line in the postseason, addressed this. Goodrow and Coleman speak to this even more, given how the Bolts needed to bolster their bottom six.

But there's something else the Lightning are going to have to fix, and it's the thing that will make or break their Stanley Cup chances: their fortitude.

Cooper famously said after the Blue Jackets series that the Lightning didn't know how to handle adversity because they never faced any during their historic regular season. "When you have the amount of points we had, it's a blessing and a curse, in a way. You don't play any meaningful hockey for a long time. Then, all of a sudden, you have to ramp it up. It's not an excuse, it's reality," Cooper said after Game 4. "That's how it goes: You have a historic regular season, and we had a historic playoff."

Indeed it was, for all the wrong reasons. The Lightning lost Game 1 because they tried to win a 3-0 game by an 8-0 score, and their sloppiness cost them. Then, they were punched in the mouth with two goals in Game 2, failed to respond and the rest is NHL postseason history.

But the fortitude questions go beyond that. Key players from this current group won two Games 7 in 2015 before taking a 2-1 lead on the road in the Stanley Cup Final ... and losing three straight to Chicago, including two one-goal games. The following season, they had a 3-2 lead over the Penguins in the Eastern Conference finals ... and lost in seven games, getting outscored 7-3 in the final two. In the 2018 Eastern Conference finals, they again blew a 3-2 lead and were outscored by the Capitals 7-0 in their final two losses of the season.

Can this team be different?

"I just like the way the year has progressed and guys have gutted some things out," Cooper said late last month, via the Athletic. "Mentally, we're just a tougher team. When you've taken your lumps a few times, which way are you going to go? Are you going to succumb to the adversity or are you going to attack it? And that's what we've been doing."

Years from now, we're either going to see the loss to the Blue Jackets last postseason as the vital education this group needed to become a champion, or the clearest indication there's a systemic malfunction with this collection of players. And the only ones who can determine what we'll see in that rearview mirror are the Lightning.

Barcelona will offer Marc-Andre ter Stegen an improved contract before the end of the year to reflect his growing importance at the club, multiple sources have told ESPN.

Barca are finalising their plans for the summer, when they will invest heavily in the squad, with Neymar and Lautaro Martinez among their top targets, before turning their attention to renewing some of the team's key players.

- ESPN La Liga fantasy: Sign up now!
- When does the transfer window re-open?

Sources have told ESPN that president Josep Maria Bartomeu, whose mandate runs until 2021, wants to ensure that both Lionel Messi and Ter Stegen have signed new deals by the time he leaves his role.

Messi's terms run until 2021 but he could leave the club for free in the summer if he chooses to. However, he recently said that he is happy at Barca, where he has spent his whole career, while the club are optimistic of agreeing a new contract with him soon.

Ter Stegen, meanwhile, has two years to run on his deal, which expires in 2022, but his role at the club has greatly changed since he signed his last renewal in 2017. After Messi, many people now feel the goalkeeper is the most important player in Quique Setien's team.

The Germany international is happy at the club but Barca will have to show him how much they value him to ensure that remains the case.

Pep Guardiola desperately tried to take him to Manchester City in 2016 before eventually signing Claudio Bravo instead, with Barca backing Ter Stegen over the Chilean, who had been their No. 1 in La Liga for the previous two seasons. Sources have told ESPN that, more recently, Juventus have shown an interest.

Reports earlier this week even suggested that Ter Stegen could leave at the end of the season but sources close to the player insist that is not the case.

Messi and Sergio Busquets are among those to have criticised the club in recent weeks as the rift between the players and the board widens and Ter Stegen also feels there are areas where things can be improved. However, his preference is to stay at Camp Nou.

In a 2018 interview with ESPN, Ter Stegen said that he feels "more and more Catalan" all the time and he has recently moved into a new house in Castelldefels, which he helped design. He also became a father for the first time in January, with the baby born in Barcelona.

He has also just signed a sponsorship deal with the Catalan car manufacturer Cupra, which sources explain is another sign of his commitment to the region which he's called his home since signing from Borussia Monchengladbach in 2014.

Cheteshwar Pujara will be back for Saurashtra for the Ranji Trophy 2019-20 final against Bengal, to be held in Rajkot next week, but it's not clear if Ravindra Jadeja will be available for the hosts as they take part in their fourth final in last eight seasons.

"Cheteshwar will be back for sure, Ravindra I am not sure," Jaydev Unadkat, the star of Saurashtra's semi-final win over Gujarat, said. "We [Pujara and I] have been constantly in touch, he cares for the team as much as I do and I am sure he will be quite happy once he lands in Mumbai. He is in the flight back from New Zealand right now."

Like Pujara, Wriddhiman Saha will be in the mix for Bengal, who have now reached the Ranji final 14 times - winning the tournament twice - but never since the 2006-07 season. Both Pujara and Saha are the Test specialists and won't be required for India duty for the ODI series against South Africa starting March 12, where Jadeja is expected to play a part.

Similarly Mohammed Shami, who took a blow to the shoulder while batting in the last Test in New Zealand, will not be in the fray for the final. "Saha will play but not Shami as the South Africa series is there," a Bengal support staffer told ESPNcricinfo.

Left-arm spinner Jack Leach has revealed that he feared for his life after contracting sepsis on England's tour of New Zealand, admitting there was a point at which he thought to himself: "Don't fall asleep because you might not wake up".

Leach suffers from Crohn's disease, an inflammatory bowel disease that requires him to take regular medication which weakens his immune system. After playing in the first Test of England's series in New Zealand, he contracted gastroenteritis, and was later hospitalised with a bout of sepsis caused by his body's response to the illness.

ALSO READ: Sickness concerns mean no handshakes for England in Sri Lanka

"I didn't know too much about it at the time, how serious it could be, but I remember feeling very, very ill," Leach told the PA news agency.

"I remember thinking, 'Don't fall asleep because you might not wake up'. It was that serious in terms of how I was feeling.

"I was out of it, really. My blood pressure was dropping quickly, my heart-rate was 190 and my temperature was 40 degrees. That's when they called an ambulance and got me to hospital. Once I got there, got the antibiotics in my arm and on to a drip, I started to feel better quite quickly but it still took a couple of nights in hospital and I was probably still recovering when I flew back from New Zealand. It took longer to get over than I thought."

Leach returned to the UK after that tour before flying out to South Africa with the rest of the England squad, but his preparations ahead of that series were blighted as he was affected badly by the sickness bug that went around the touring party.

"These things affect the older generation a bit more but with the medication I'm on, my immune system might be similar to that" Jack Leach

"I picked up a couple of things out there and my body couldn't cope with it," he said.

"Other people got ill but I struggled to fight it off as well as a healthy person. The medication I'm on for Crohn's weakens my immune system, so it is just a bit more of a struggle.

"You can start to feel fine in general but playing high-level sport is a completely different thing and that's probably something I didn't think about enough.

"As sportsmen we try to push through pain. You don't want to be weak mentally or physically but unfortunately that was the situation: I was weak physically. With your health you sometimes have to take a step back."

England have taken precautions in an attempt to ensure that their squad is not affected by illness on their tour of Sri Lanka, having landed on Tuesday, with captain Joe Root confirming the players would not be shaking hands with one another and medical staff giving out 'immunity packs'.

And while the global crisis surrounding the outbreak of coronavirus is a concern, Leach admitted that he was reassured by the fact that only one case has been confirmed in Sri Lanka so far.

"I've come to a safer place," Leach said. "I've been nervous in England but I feel fine here.

"I guess I am a little bit more concerned than others. These things affect the older generation a bit more but with the medication I'm on, my immune system might be similar to that. We've been given packs to use with wipes, hand sanitiser, we're drinking bottled water. I just have to do the right things and keep my fingers crossed."

England have coped with Leach's absence this winter thanks in part to the international emergence of his Somerset team-mate Dom Bess, who impressed in South Africa after being called into the squad as a late replacement.

But Leach will have an important role in Sri Lanka, as the only member of the spin trio that took a combined 48 wickets on England's last tour in 2018-19 still in the squad, with Moeen Ali and Adil Rashid both missing.

His involvement in the series briefly looked doubtful on account of a calf injury, but he had been bowling at Taunton and Loughborough before departure and is confident that he will be fit to play.

"I had a little setback with my calf a couple of weeks ago but I'm recovering well. I'm still maybe a little bit off but we've got a bit of time, so it's about progressively getting back.

"I'll be bowling in training and see how we go. The main part of the tour is two Test matches and I'll be doing everything I can to be back for them.

"I look back with fond memories on the last tour. It was nice to be part of that with Mo and Adil - I learned a lot from them. It's a different spin group this time but it's going to be more of the same in terms of what we do. I've definitely got some ideas that helped me last time that I'll be passing on to the boys. It's going to be good fun."

West Indies won the toss and chose to bat first in the first T20, in Pallekele.

Brandon King made his first international appearance on the tour, partnering Llendl Simmons at the top of the order, which meant that despite Shai Hope's outstanding form in the ODIs, there was no room for him in this XI. West Indies also left out legspinner Hayden Walsh Jr, which meant that left-arm spinner Fabian Allen was the only frontline spin option in the XI.

Oshane Thomas and Sheldon Cottrell were the main fast bowlers, with Andre Russell, Dwayne Bravo and Kieron Pollard also included.

Sri Lanka, meanwhile retained their two wristspinners from the ODIs, leaving room for only two main fast bowlers - Isuru Udana and captain Lasith Malinga. Niroshan Dickwella continued to be omitted from the XI, though Shehan Jayasuriya and Dasun Shanaka came into the side.

West Indies: 1 Llendl Simmons, 2 Brandon King, 3 Shimron Hetmyer, 4 Kieron Pollard (capt.), 5 Nicholas Pooran (wk), 6 Andre Russell, 7 Rovman Powell, 8 Dwayne Bravo, 9 Fabian Allen, 10 Sheldon Cottrell, 11 Oshane Thomas

Sri Lanka: 1 Avishka Fernando, 2 Kusal Perera, 3 Kusal Mendis, 4 Shehan Jayasuriya, 5 Angelo Mathews, 6 Dasun Shanaka, 7 Thisara Perera, 8 Wanindu Hasaranga, 9 Isuru Udana, 10 Lakshan Sanakan, 11 Lasith Malinga (capt.)

This case is not an episode of "Law & Order," wrapped up in a nice tidy hour of television.

The evidence is murky and inconclusive. Then again, maybe the evidence -- such as it might be -- doesn't matter.

The Houston Astros, after all, have admitted to cheating in 2017, offering apologies for their actions if not exactly contrition for their sins. The commissioner's report on the sign-stealing scandal found the Astros, even after the September memo sent to all teams reminding them of league regulations prohibiting the use of electronic equipment for stealing signs, "continued to both utilize the replay review room and the monitor located next to the dugout to decode signs for the remainder of the regular season and Postseason."

The public has rendered its verdict. Case closed, World Series trophy forever tarnished.

One thing we still don't know, however: How much did the Astros actually benefit from stealing signs? One popular piece of supposed confirmation that has become widely quoted is that in Game 5 of the World Series -- that wild 13-12 win for the Astros over the Dodgers -- the Astros didn't have a single swing-and-miss against Clayton Kershaw's breaking stuff. The great Kershaw, who just five days earlier had dominated the Astros at Dodger Stadium, striking out 11 batters in seven innings. No swing-and-misses?

Is that proof? Well, for starters, it was actually one swing-and-miss against his breaking stuff, not zero, and four in the game, out of the 94 pitches Kershaw threw in Game 5. That is a low total. But even in his dominant Game 1 start at home, Kershaw induced just eight swing-and-misses, five on his breaking stuff.

With all that in mind, I thought it would be interesting to go back and watch Game 5. I also watched Game 4, when Dodgers starter Alex Wood didn't allow a hit until the sixth inning, a game the Dodgers won 6-2 (the only postseason game the Astros lost at home that year).

In comparing the two games, one thing stands out: No matter what the Astros knew or didn't know, Kershaw did not pitch a good game. His slider was inconsistent all game long, often flattening out over the middle of the plate instead of diving in and below the knees to right-handed batters. Yuli Gurriel hit a big three-run homer off a slider that tied the game 4-4 in the fourth inning and it was an absolute cookie.

None of this will change anyone's opinion on anything and there is no smoking gun, but here are my notes from re-watching the two games.

Game 4: Alex Wood

Wood had an excellent season in 2017, going 16-3 with a 2.72 ERA, including 10-0 with a 1.67 ERA in the first half. Relying on a two-seamer/changeup/curveball selection, he made the All-Star team with that huge first half, but his home run rate climbed in the second half and manager Dave Roberts moved him to the back of the rotation in the postseason. In fact, one storyline heading into his Oct. 28 start was that Wood had pitched just once in a month, starting Game 4 of the National League Championship Series 10 days earlier -- when the Cubs tagged him for three home runs in 4⅔ innings.

General observations:

You're not going to hear any trash-can banging on the Fox broadcast, or at least I couldn't while watching back on YouTube. While the commissioner's report said the Astros were still cheating in the postseason, it's possible they had changed to another identifying signal by this time. An Astros fan named Tony Adams watched 58 home games from 2017 that were available on video and listened to every pitch, logging any banging noises he heard. He tracked 8,274 pitches and found a banging noise before 1,143 of them (the bangs were deployed to indicate a breaking ball).

After the Danny Farquhar game on Sept. 21 -- when the White Sox pitcher evidently picked up on the system -- the banging slowed down. In the final two regular-season games that Adams monitored, he registered just one bang each game. In two playoff games against the Boston Red Sox, he registered just one bang. Adams does not list, however, the American League Championship Series games against the New York Yankees or the World Series games against the Dodgers.

It's important to note that you rarely see the catcher signs from the game feed. With Fox hyperactively moving from close-ups of the pitcher to the hitter to the dugout to the on-deck hitter and so on, you often don't get the center-field camera shot until the pitcher is beginning his delivery. You see the catcher signs maybe a quarter of the time. Which is why Houston bench coach Alex Cora, according to the report, arranged for a video room technician to install the monitor outside the dugout to display the live feed of the center-field camera.

OK, some notes on Wood's game in the ever-popular numbered list format:

(1) The first two pitches of the game were actually pretty constructive, showing the Dodgers were certainly suspicious that something might be going on with the Astros. I checked another feed of the game I have access to at ESPN, and on the first pitch of the game you see catcher Austin Barnes going through a series of signs, which you don't normally do with nobody on base. Before the second pitch, Wood actually stepped off the rubber and Barnes cycled through the signs again.

(2) "We'd heard whispers of some of the shady stuff they'd been doing," Wood told The Athletic's Andy McCullough in December. "Obviously, we had no idea it was to the extent that came out." The Dodgers grew even more paranoid after they witnessed the Astros using multiple signs with no runners on base during the first two games at Dodger Stadium -- the Astros themselves were paranoid about sign-stealing from the opposition. Baseball as presented by Robert Ludlum and John le Carré. As a result, Wood was constantly changing his signs. "We probably didn't go eight or 10 pitches that whole time without changing," he said.

(3) When Jose Altuve stepped in for his first at-bat, Fox flashed a graphic showing Altuve hitting .517 at home in seven playoff games with five home runs. "You look at these home playoff numbers, sometimes it's hard to explain," Joe Buck said. Well, that's one way to put it. The Astros went 8-1 at home that postseason, hitting .273/.343/.519 compared to .208/.284/.347 on the road. Of course, the Yankees went 6-0 at home and 1-6 on the road with a larger OPS difference than the Astros, so be careful where you cast your small-sample-size stones.

(4) At times, Wood and Barnes used just one sign, such as with Evan Gattis batting in the third inning. Without seeing the catcher on every pitch, it's hard to know how often the Dodgers used multiple signs and how often they used just one when nobody was on base.

(5) With Marwin Gonzalez batting in the third inning, Fox showed a graphic with the Astros' decline in strikeout rate from 2016 to 2018: From 27th to first. "Credit the organization," John Smoltz said. This is one of the overriding narratives about the 2017 Astros, although it's important to note that due to personnel changes (such as the addition of Gurriel and Alex Bregman's first full season), preseason forecasts projected a steep drop in strikeouts for the Astros -- with or without cheating. One study, by Rob Arthur of Baseball Prospectus, using Adams' data, concluded "the loud banging scheme for which the Astros got caught seems to have done at least as much harm as it did good."

At least in the regular season. But we don't really know what happened in the postseason. Like I said, it's all murky and muddy.

(6) Bregman lined out to center in the fourth on a 3-1 fastball -- with Barnes clearly flashing just one sign. Bregman hit it pretty good: 96 mph exit velocity. In fact, the Astros had a fair number of hard outs in the game, although most of those came on the ground. They had three outs against Wood on exit velocities over 100 mph; those are usually hits. They had four more outs on balls between 95 and 100 mph. Wood was good, he moved the ball around and kept everything down, but he was also fortunate in some regards. Indeed, he had just four swing-and-miss strikes out of the 84 pitches he threw. At the same time, give him credit. The Astros weren't able to lift the ball, even if they did know what was coming. Really, it shows how hard it is to hit major league pitching, even if you might know what pitch is coming.

(7) George Springer finally broke up Wood's no-hitter with a two-out home run in the sixth inning, crushing a 3-1 slider into the Crawford Boxes in left field. Wood kept the pitch down, but it was over the middle part of the plate. That gave the Astros a 1-0 lead, although the Dodgers would tie the game in seventh and then score five in the ninth to even the series with a 6-2 win. I think one key aspect to Wood's game is he worked very quickly, often seemingly started his delivery as Barnes was still flashing the sign. That will be in stark contrast to Kershaw, who will slow way down when runners got on base -- in theory, making it easier for the Astros to relay stolen signs to the hitter. Of course, Wood had allowed just two walks before Springer's homer and never had to pitch with a runner on second base, making it easier to remain in a fast-paced rhythm.

Game 5: Clayton Kershaw & Co.

Let's move on to one of the wildest games in World Series, that 10-inning battle that lasted 5 hours, 17 minutes. With Kershaw pitching -- coming off that 11-strikeout outing in Game 1 -- the Dodgers built an early 4-0 lead. Kershaw couldn't hold it. The Astros tied the game but the Dodgers went back ahead 7-4. Kershaw couldn't hold that lead, either. Maybe it was the ball.

An interesting report had surfaced from Sports Illustrated's Tom Verducci prior to Game 5: The World Series baseballs were slicker than the regular-season baseballs, according to pitchers and coaches on both the Astros and Dodgers. This made it particularly hard to throw a slider, they claimed. Verducci wrote that earlier in the postseason he had heard similar complaints about the ball from the Indians.

"The World Series ball is slicker. No doubt," Astros starter Justin Verlander said. "I had trouble throwing the ball," Dodgers starter Yu Darvish said. "It was slicker."

With that in the background, Kershaw took the ball for Game 5.

(1) Despite the concerns about the ball, the Dodgers entered Game 5 hitting .176 and the Astros entered hitting .226. Those numbers would go up after this game. It's also worth noting that Kershaw was on full rest after throwing just 83 pitches in Game 1 -- Roberts had vowed not to use him on short rest this postseason like in the past. Anyway, on Kershaw's first pitch to Springer, Barnes set up inside and the fastball was outside, off the plate. Kershaw would not have his A-plus command in this game.

(2) Kershaw ended the first by striking out Altuve swinging on a 1-2 slider -- the only swing-and-miss he'd get all game on a breaking ball. It actually wasn't a good pitch, a slider with little movement left up in the zone over the middle of the plate.

(3) Kershaw retired the first six batters, working quickly. In the second, he threw a good 2-2 slider to Gurriel that he took just below the knees -- the kind of pitch that Kershaw is used to racking up strikeouts with and might make you wonder if Gurriel knew to lay off. But he didn't throw many of those good sliders in this game.

This is my first stab at a top 100 prospects list for Major League Baseball at ESPN after doing this a few times at FanGraphs. The idea is to combine various advanced metrics, industry sources (mostly scouts and executives) and my own eyeballs to rank players, essentially based on their trade value.

I would normally say "based on how good of a player I think they'll be," but it's always more complicated than that. There are plenty of players at the lowest levels of the minors in whom I have a lot of faith, but the risk created by their not yet facing upper-level competition and their being years behind other prospects in terms of when they'll reach the big leagues can really hurt their value, independent of how good they are.

With that said, a word or two about the process:

• You might read some reports and wonder what you're missing when I describe a player in Triple-A whom I project to be a solid regular but not much more, but teams really value those six to seven years of team control (i.e., before free agency) that a ready-made, everyday player offers. It's a tough balancing act considering these factors, so trade value is the easiest shorthand to sum up that combination.

• There are also plenty of differences among sources on where these prospects should be rated, one skill that will define whether they will succeed, players with big potential variance in outcomes, etc. I try to explain those key factors in the write-up on each player.

• I share tool grades for players to give you an idea of how each of their abilities compares to major league average along with a detailed breakdown for the top 25. "Plus" means 60 on the 20-80 scouting, where 50 is MLB average and 60 is one standard deviation above that, 70 is two standard deviations, etc. When I call a player's hit tool a "50/70," that means he has a 50 ability to make contact now, and I project 70 will be his peak.

• I also use something called Future Value, shortened to FV hereafter, as a term that sums up the value of a player into one number. It's also graded on the 20-80 scouting scale. A low-end everyday player is a 50, which correlates to 2.0 WAR; a well above average position player, No. 3 starter or high-end closer is a 60, or somewhere around 3.0 WAR. I refrain from tossing out an 80 on minor leaguers because that would imply one is expected to be one of the top players in baseball. Wander Franco, this year's top prospect, is the best prospect baseball has seen since Mike Trout.

How the four-midable Gail Ramsay and Amanda Sobhy got there first
CSA Intercollegiate Individual Championship preview by RICHARD MILLMAN – Squash Mad Correspondent

The team cheers, heartbreaks, crazy celebrations, heroic comeback victories and soul destroying ‘almost wons’ are done for another season for both the men’s and the women’s teams, in the CSA Intercollegiate team championships.

But CSA College squash isn’t done yet, for the 2019-20 season. This weekend, in Philadelphia, in large part at University of Pennsylvania’s brilliantly refurbished Ringe courts, the best of the best, the top two players from each of the Intercollegiate community’s teams, will come together to play for the ultimate Intercollegiate individual crown, the Intercollegiate champion.

Names to conjure with such Vehslage, Nayar, Jernigan, Desaulnier, Stanley, Ezra, El Halaby have won the men’s three times out of four, but no-one has yet won the ultimate – four years in a row. It couldn’t have happened in the early years because Freshmen (first year players) often weren’t allowed to play on the Varsity (older students) team.

But even in the age of Ali Farag, the elusive fourth title still stands out there, beckoning to the men.

Perhaps l’incroyable Victor Crouin might be the first.

To review the history back to the first winner of this event, Beekman Pool, follow this link

The women, on the other hand, are superior to the men in this regard. Names such as Zaharko, McConnell, Holleran, Beaver, and Kennedy have attained extraordinary heights in winning three Intercollegiate titles.

But standing along among all Intercollegiate players are first Penn State’s Gail Ramsay – the first player man or women to win four consecutive Intercollegiate championships and second, Harvard’s Amanda Sobhy, who recently equalled Ramsay’s feat.

This year Georgina Kennedy, another Harvard woman, has the opportunity to join this elite twosome. But will she?

To see the history of the women’s Intercollegiate individual championships, follow this link

A final word.

As the Intercollegiate organization has evolved into the dynamic, world class organization it is today, the coaches and athletic departments concluded that it was necessary to form a professional administration to more fully advance and streamline the development of the organization.

Hence the CSA – College Squash Association was formed and David Poolman, was appointed as its executive director.

In an highly charged atmosphere, where youthful enthusiasm combined with the American addiction to winning at all costs, must be carefully guided; David Poolman has done a wonderful job of both walking a sometimes fine line to maintain fairness and at the same time brought the organization into the modern era of Livestream coverage, Social Media, International recruiting, rising costs and integration with US Squash – the most progressive governing body in World Squash.

So, as we watch the genius of the young rising stars, the champions that may continue into the ranks of the pros and those seniors for whom this is their last hurrah, spare a thought for David Poolman, Executive Director of the CSA, who is quietly guiding the ship that is the most vital heart of American squash, whilst moving quietly and effectively in the background to ensure safe sailing.

Pictures courtesy of College Squash Association 

Concussions were reduced by 28% at the 2019 Rugby World Cup compared with the 2018 elite competition average, according to World Rugby.

It was the first World Cup to use the high-tackle sanction framework, offering guidance on how to punish dangerous contact.

There were 74% more yellow cards and 138% more red cards at the tournament than in elite competition in 2018 and World Rugby says this was "a direct contributing factor" to reduced concussions.

The high-tackle sanction framework was created to change player behaviour, encouraging them to lower their tackle height.

World Rugby chief medical officer Dr Eanna Falvey explained that the framework was introduced following research showing 76% of all concussions occur in a tackle, with the tackler sustaining 72% of all concussions.

And there were 37% fewer concussions occurring in the tackle at the World Cup than in elite competition in 2018.

Fewer injury replacements were used than at any other World Cup on record.

On average, 1.13 injury replacements were used per match at the 2019 World Cup compared with 2.08 in 2015.

"These hugely encouraging outcomes of this study endorse our unwavering evidence-based commitment to injury prevention, particularly our continued efforts to protect players from concussive events on the rugby field wherever possible," World Rugby chairman Sir Bill Beaumont said.

"The significant reduction in concussion incidence provides compelling evidence of what can be achieved when competition owners, match officials, disciplinary officers, players and coaches fully buy in to the high-tackle sanction framework. Failure to do so can have significant player welfare and performance consequences."