Friday Incompletions

Mats Sundin isn’t wrong to wonder why divisional winners are automatically granted one of the top three seeds in the each conference, or whether that’s a fair system. It isn't. Divisional winners should be guaranteed a playoff spot, not a high seed. That said, two points to consider. Sundin’s Maple Leafs benefited from weird systems themselves in years past, making the playoffs as the fourth Norris Division team in the 1980s with point totals of 52 and 57. As well, the Southeast is a better division that some would think, with both the Central and Pacific sporting two doormats. . .Dale Hawerchuk never played a game in Phoenix and was gone from Winnipeg 17 years ago, yet they’re retiring his number in the desert. Nice gesture, but makes no real sense. Why not have a night for Lars-Erik Sjoberg or Joe Daley while they’re at it?. .Agree or disagree; Joey Graham is MLSE’s basketball version of Nik Antropov. . . .The Masters is still a few days away and already I feel like throwing up over the utter pomposity of the event. . .Roger Federer is suddenly showing some vulnerability. In case you didn’t notice, the great Swiss has been dispatched in two consecutive tournaments by Guillermo Canas, a former Canadian Open winner. . .The NHL’s silly way of dealing with injuries was exposed over the past few days by the way in which the New York Islanders were permitted to pretend to the hockey world that goalie Rick DiPietro didn’t have a concussion but now has post-concussion syndrome. The league’s pledge to be more forthcoming on injuries will be seen in due course as no improvement at all. What they don't understand is the "upper body" and "lower body" just makes a mockery of their own game . .Serge Savard tore a strip off Gary Bettman this week for his lack of leadership in dealing with the issue of fighting in hockey. “Bettman comes out this week and says fighting is part of the game,” said Savard. “Well that depends (on) what you want to do with your game. We’re the only sport that allows it.” Savard’s complaint was that the league was years behind in dealing with the problem of hooking and interfererence in the game, denying forever there was a problem, and now is doing the very same thing all over again with the hot button fighting issue. Hard to argue with that analysis. But who's Serge Savard, right? Or Ken Dryden. Or Mike Bossy. . .’Twas strange that the CFL called a 3 p.m. press conference on Wednesday to announce the hiring of Mark Cohon as its new commissioner. Was the league embarrassed? Did it not want people to notice?. . .We’ll see how forceful Cohon plans to be as a leader when faced with the first team charged with salary cap violations, particularly if that team is Montreal or B.C.. . .Having another Summit Series isn’t the worst idea, but it’s a notion from another time. Moreover, with the Olympics, world championships and world junior championships, not to mention the temporarily mothballed World Cup, there’s just no room for another international shinny event to have any meaning. . .It’s interesting that the NHLPA now seems quite content to let suspended Ted Saskin sit at home and go without any formal leadership while it sorts a few things out. This approach would have worked much better if applied at the end of the lockout before Saskin was quickly inserted into the job of executive director. . .Interesting to see the Pittsburgh Penguins referred to as the “Pengs” in the summaries of Canada’s national newspaper today. Never seen that before, sort of a cross between the “Pens” and the “’Peg”, once speculated upon as a possible home for that hockey club . .How awful have the Philadelphia Flyers been this season? The Phoenix Coyotes have been in freefall for a month and are still 10 points clear of the Broad St. Patsies. . .The best argument for the NHL not to expand its current playoff format is the race in the East Conference. Allowing more teams in would mean this amazing race wouldn’t be generating the attention it is because all the teams would have qualified. . .Jack Johnson played almost 19 minutes in his L.A. debut on Thursday against Vancouver, going a minus-1 with one shot while wearing No. 33. He was on the ice for two of the four Canucks goals, one shorthanded. He, rookie Anze Kopitar and forward Mike Cammalleri are decent building blocks for the Kings to work with. Goaltending remains the big problem . . Amazing news out of New York. Now that the Rangers are winning again, suddenly there are reports from certain quarters that the NHL game is at its best since the lockout. Funny how that works.

Mail Bag

Damien Cox answers your Maple Leafs questions. Click here to send Damien a question and he'll answer a selection in his mail bag every Thursday in this space.

---

Q: Hello Mr. Cox:

I would very much like to hear your take on Ted Saskin. You have said that "his replacement would likely be a hard-ass, antagonistic opponent (for the owners) with which to deal." Is that not all the more reason for the union to replace him? Is his knowledge base of the CBA so invaluable that the players would suffer by his loss? And assuming not, who would be good candidates to replace him?

Andrew Stancek, Tillsonburg, Ont.

A: I think the piece to which you’re referring was a response to the notion that NHL owners were quietly chortling in their Scotch as the union descended into civil war and roasted Saskin on a spit. The reality is that they felt Saskin was a guy they could work with, while they couldn’t work very well with his predecessor, Bob Goodenow. Just as the easy-going coach is replaced by the tough guy, so too does it seem that if the union was unhappy with Saskin, his replacement would be a very different type of leader, one not as easy for NHL owners to work with.

As far as good candidates to replace him, I don’t have a list for you. I could throw out a bunch of names, but its entirely unclear at the moment who will be driving the process for the NHLPA, what that process will be or the type of leader they want.

---

Q: Why is (Pat) Quinn not coaching in the NHL? He enjoyed some very good and consistant plus 90 point years with the Leafs. Why is Brian Leetch not playing? Even with his advanced age the new NHL is perfect for him.

Glen McMinn, Halifax

A: Pat Quinn isn’t coaching, I assume, because his price tag is too high – he didn’t like the Boston offer last summer or he could have had that job – and because many people in the hockey industry question his style of coaching.

That said, the same is probably the case for Mike Keenan, and he keeps getting hired. I don’t believe Quinn’s coaching career is over, and suspect he’ll be back in the NHL sometime next season.

Re Leetch, he’s not playing mostly he’s not motivated to do so, and that’s partly because in the capped-NHL he might have difficult attracting the kind of salary he enjoyed before.

Given that he has missed this entire season, its unlikely he’ll play again.

---

Q: Hi Damien:

It has been my experience in hockey that often "politics" play a major role in personnel decisions and it is not always the best player who makes the team. At this point in the season I am confused as to why Andrew Raycroft continues to get as many starts as he does. Is there more to the decision to continually sit Aubin than we are privy to?

Bill Ireland, Truro, N.S.

A: Well, for starters Aubin didn’t exactly shine when given the opportunity to play this season. That said, there’s no question the Leafs have a great deal more invested in Raycroft, specifically a three-year contract, and when Aubin wasn’t exactly challenging him they decided to let Raycroft have the job and run with it.

The interesting question is whether they’ll bring Aubin back or find a more experienced netminder who might challenge Raycroft more next season.

---

Q: One keeps hearing that the Leafs need to blow this team up, get bad for a few years and build through high draft choices in the manner of Pittsburgh. I have my doubts about this theory if for no other reason than Pittsburgh lucked out in the lottery, and there's never any guarantee that even if you're horrible, you get a future star. More to the point, consider a team like Detroit, which seems perpetually to be in the Stanley Cup hunt without having to sacrifice a number of years to retain sustained excellence. Isn't that a model Toronto ought to look toward, particularly as this is another high revenue franchise, with a comparably dedicated fan base? Of course, Detroit has Ken Holland as its GM and Toronto has ... well, we won't go there. Or will the ownership cynically decide that so long as the ACC is full every night, the team is destined to be mired in perpetual mediocrity?

Marshall Auerback, Denver

A: Well, the issue of the motivation of the Leaf franchise to win is the never-ending question, isn’t it? But whether you or I might argue that the Pittsburgh model is the proper way to go, the fact is the Leafs aren’t going to go down that path. They do have a promising foundation of young players both with the team now and coming up, and the question is whether that foundation is good enough to produce a top-end team down the line. Certainly, Detroit is a model for every other team that you don’t necessarily have to draft high to find talent.

---

Q: Damien,

What are you hearing about Karel Pilar? Is it reasonable to think he might be able to resume his career in Toronto? Secondary question: Is it me, or doesn't Carlo Colaiacovo look awfully good many nights? If he can stay healthy, he looks like a really great draft pick, even arriving late as he has. I'm not optimistic about our chances of making the playoffs this year, but that defence corps could set up well for a long time if JFJ is smarter than he appears.

Steve Cassel, Toronto

A: Pilar has re-surfaced with the Marlies, great news for him. Whether he can be a candidate for NHL work next season is probably a long-shot, if only because there are so many players stacked up in front of him. Colaiacovo, I agree, has progressed immensely this season, and with Ian White, Staffan Kronwall and Andy Wozniewski gives the Leafs an appealing youth wing to go with their more veteran defencemen. The blueline looks to be the deepest part of the team right now.

---

Q: Damien,

Hypothetical situation - you are the commissioner of a fantasy NHL where you have sweeping powers to re-locate franchises as you see fit for the betterment of the game (in search of profits, good fan base, etc), all of the owners are OK with you to make such decisions on their behalf.

If you are to pick 4 teams from the current league, which 4 teams would you choose to re-locate and why.

Brian Griffin, Toronto

A: Before I answer, what would be the salary of such a job? Oh, never mind.

Florida and Atlanta look like very, very iffy markets both now and down the line. Washington has had more than 30 years to stabilize and still hasn’t. Long Island, meanwhile, has been bad for a long, long time, and the dream of a new area remains a distant one. Phoenix looks lousy right now, but it would be interesting to see if a good team in that very nice arena might ultimately work. Nashville doesn’t seem to be attracting the support one would think possible with a very strong team. St. Louis looks dicey at the moment, but I really believe that situation will turn around.

Those are the candidates. If I had to pick four to move, I would pick Florida, Atlanta, Washington and the Islanders. Wouldn't be much left of the Southeast Division, would there?

---

Q: I watched the reporters today and agreed with everyone's feelings about fighting in hockey. You stated that the NHL could get rid of anything they wanted to and I couldn;t agree more. One of the journalists on ESPN's version of the reporters mentioned that the NBA is serious about their image and as a result, suspended one of their star players - Carmelo Anthony - for 15 games for throwing a sucker punch at an opponent. If the NHL were serious about getting rid of fighting, they could easily suspend the 3-4 minute a game GOON similarly and it wouldn't be long that these so-called role players would be out of the NHL for good.

Your comments?

John Vincent, London

A: Well, I think that’s obviously true. That the NHL takes no action means that it wants goons in the game, and there are certainly no shortage of people who would argue that such players are necessary and entertaining. I don’t buy that, but some people do.

But the fact is that the NHL can have whatever game it wants to have. For people like myself who have children in minor hockey, the corollary is that minor hockey can be as good as the NHL will let it be because the big leagues have so much influence.

The NBA and NFL don’t want fighting in their games, so they’ve all but rooted it out entirely. The NHL does want fighting, so it bends the rules and makes allowances to make sure players will no ability other than to throw punches can gain lucrative employment in the league.

---

Click here to send Damien a question and he'll answer a selection in his mail bag every Thursday in this space.

Time to Send a Message

For Andrew Raycroft, it's a statement game, pure and simple.

Time to show every doubting Maple Leaf fan and observer of the hockey club that he is worthy of holding the status of the team's No. 1 goalie, both now and next year and even when and if Justin Pogge is ready to be an NHLer.

Beating Carolina is all the Leafs need to do, whether it's 1-0 or 9-8.

But for Raycroft, who has convinced pretty much no one that he is the answer in net for the Leafs this season, 1-0 would be a lot better.

There are many who would make excuses for Raycroft's inconsistencies, and some of those excuses even hold water.

This is, really, only his third full NHL season, and perhaps the ups and downs go with the learning process.

I get that.

But at this point it doesn't really matter what the reasons may or may not be.

It's time to deliver the goods.

Some would suggest that Raycroft is at a disadvantage because his team gives up more shots and scoring chances.

The stats, however, don't really bear that out. Martin Brodeur faces an average of 27.8 shots per game, and Roberto Luongo faces 29.1 shots per game.

Based on the argument that Raycroft is under siege every night, you'd expect his average night to be a 31-32 shot bombardment, right?

Nope. He sits at an average of 28.1, barely more than Brodeur and less than Luongo.

Yet his save percentage and goals-against average are so much worse.

The Leafs hope he's going to get better next season and beyond, and perhaps that will happen.

But he needs to stand up now. Tonight. This is one of four games the Leafs have left against teams they're jostling with for a playoff spot, and losing tonight would pretty much mean they'd have to finish 6-0 the rest of the way.

In that way, it's Game 7 tonight. Time for a money goalie to step forward.

Searching for a Discussion

Poor tired old Hockey Night in Canada.

Despite exhaustive efforts (presumably) by its production and research staff, HNIC has still not been able to turn up a single person capable of expressing the growing sentiment against fighting in the sport.

You'd think with all those taxpayer dollars behind it HNIC might be able to find a single voice in the hockey world to occasionally disagree with the program's stridently pro-fighting platform.

Instead, it's "fighting is part of the game" before the game, during the first period intermission when we see hockey's version of Ann (Anybody Who Disagrees with me is a Fag) Coulter, during the second period intermission panel discussion and after the game.

Not one voice to challenge the notion that fighting is desperately needed in the sport. It's almost as if HNIC and its chief opinion makers are frightened of actually having to defend their antiquated notions of the sport. They're so insecure, folks, they have to replay old shows to make themselves feel better.

But maybe Joel Darling and his staff just couldn't find somebody. Or maybe having a certain point-of-view is a pre-requisite to participating in that program?

Well, let's help them out, shall we?

Right there in the ACC on Saturday night, after all, was one of hockey's more reasoned, intelligent and independent thinkers, injuried Maple Leaf forward Michael Peca.

Peca has been through the wars, playing as a little man in what has become a big man's game, and playing it with an edge the entire way.

So here's what Peca had to say about fighting in an interview with The Star's Paul Hunter:

"Traditionalists will say it has a place in the game, it helps police the game. There’s a whole theory about that but, on the other hand, guys are getting hurt. I don’t think it’s just the fighting. I think it’s blows to the head in general.

"I’m sure there’ll come a day when, much like in football, you just can’t hit the head whether it’s your shoulder or anything. Then fighting becomes a little redundant because those are basically blows to the head.

"I think fighting will eventually find itself out of the game. There might be people worried that then the stick fouls and everything will increase but I think it’ll come to a point where respect for the game will kind of balance that out.

"Ninety per cent of the time it doesn’t really serve a purpose any more in the game so take it for what’s its worth."

That's just one NHLer's opinion, but while some would have you believe all NHLers think fighting is wonderful, there are lots more just like Peca out there.

Even HNIC might be able to find one.

NOTE: Given that a couple of readers have wondered if The Star isn't just as guilty as HNIC in airing both sides of the fighting debate, I figured it was worthwhile to point out that Rosie DiManno took a decidedly pro-fighting stance in her coverage of the Belak-Janssen scrap last week and Kevin McGran published a piece with both sides of the fighting debate last week as well.

More to the point, I don't think there's any shortage of availability of pro-fighting opinions out there. It's the silent majority that is far under-represented in the public debate.

Bertuzzi Returns

JERRY S. MENDOZA/AP

Todd Bertuzzi made his debut as a Detroit Red Wing last night, skating on the top line in a 2-1 shootout loss to Columbus.

There's a lot less swagger and a great deal of rust, but Todd Bertuzzi is back.

Not only is he back, but the Detroit Red Wings made a strong statement to the big winger and the hockey world Thursday night in a 2-1 shootout loss to Columbus that Bertuzzi is a big part of their plan for the rest of the season and the playoffs.

He skated on Detroit's top line with Pavel Datsyuk and Tomas Holmstrom, and participated in all the team's power play chances. He played 16:21 and managed one shot on goal and one official hit. He participated in the shootout, making his trademark backhand move and clanking the puck off the crossbar.

For a guy who hadn't played since October following back surgery, he looked fine, if neither imposing nor particularly dangerous and probably a little tentative.

At 32 years of age with a lot of water under the bridge, this is Bertuzzi's best chance to re-establish himself as a top-flight NHL attacker. The Red Wings, unlike the Canucks when Bertuzzi was in Vancouver, are a team that relies on skill, speed and experience to win games, and at his best Bertuzzi has always been more of a finesse player than a muscleman.

Whether he can produce enough to stay with Datsyuk will be interesting to see. Henrik Zetterberg didn't play for the Wings last night, so there was ice time available for Bertuzzi to take in a variety of offensive situations.

He played mostly left wing, but in his best years he was most dangerous going to the net from the right wing. Mike Babcock may or may not make that switch.

What we won't find out until the playoffs begin is whether Bertuzzi has matured enough to keep his temper under control and stay out of the penalty box when the checking gets tighter and the frustrations grow for talented players trying to score.

He wasn't able to do that effectively as a Canuck. He was completely overmatched at the Olympics last year as a member of Team Canada. When it came to making deals before the Feb. 27 deadline, Detroit GM Ken Holland would have preferred Peter Forsberg, Keith Tkachuk or Bill Guerin, and instead ended up hedging his bets by acquiring two question marks in Bertuzzi and Kyle Calder.

On this Detroit team, meanwhile, the pressure is going to be on Datsyuk and Zetterberg to score and lead the offensive charge in the post-season, not Bertuzzi.

If the Wings fail in the playoffs, it won't be Bertuzzi getting the blame this time.

Let's see if a secondary type role fits. Then again, right now the Wings seem determined to play him as a primary player, whether he's ready for the challenge or not.

Mail Bag

Click here to send Damien a question and he'll answer a selection in his mail bag every Thursday in this space.

 

Q: You say the Leafs will have $10 million to play with next year. How so? Who is already under contract, and how many players do they need to sign with that remaining $10 million? Also, does that $10 million take into account Sundin's club option? Could that number potentially rise above $10 million by trades? And realistically, in your opinion, which free agents this summer do you think the Leafs will actually go hard after, and which ones do you think they SHOULD go hard after. Personally I think they need a scoring winger (i.e. a Selanne-type player, who they could have had for cheap coming out of the lockout) and a centre. Thoughts?
Joey Wilson, Toronto

A: Wow, could I give you the history of the franchise, as well? That’s a lot of in-depth questions for a mail bag, so I’m going to give you the reader’s digest version. Apologies if it’s insufficient.

Basically, the Leafs can have however much money available they want to make available. Other than a small group of players that includes Bryan McCabe, Darcy Tucker and Tomas Kaberle, they have flexibility on any number of contracts, be they players who could be traded or others headed for free agency who may not be resigned.

If you believe the club will retain McCabe, Kaberle, Pavel Kubina, Hal Gill, Andrew Raycroft, Tucker, Mats Sundin (at whatever numbers), Alex Steen, Alexei Ponikarovsky, Kyle Wellwood, Matt Stajan, John Pohl and Wade Belak, then you work from there.

Their key decisions involve Carlo Colaiacovo, Ian White, Nik Antropov, Mike Peca and Jeff O’Neill.

Assume they don’t re-sign Peca and O’Neill, at least not at their current combined $4 million. A charge for the retired Tie Domi goes away this summer while one for the bought-out Ed Belfour still has a year to go, the cap is likely to go up to $48 million or higher and the plan is to rework Sundin’s contract to produce more favourable cap figure.

Right there is $9-10 million of new cap space. If they want more, they could create more by letting other players go. They could choose not to re-sign Antropov (unlikely) or Sundin (very unlikely).

I think if you look at this Leaf roster and envision it with Jason Blake and Chris Drury, plus perhaps Curtis Joseph as a backup to Raycroft, it looks a lot stronger.

The Leafs will certainly be in there pitching at free agent time, but so will a lot of other clubs.

 

---

Q: Looking ahead to next year, I think the Leafs need to clear cap space to bring in scoring, grit up-front, and goaltending help. Peca has defensive & leadership value, but is clearly overpriced at $2.5 million. Despite his 20 goals, I wouldn't re-sign O'Neil at any price as he doesn't appear to be a good fit and is invisible most nights. How do you see the Leafs upgrading at forward in the off-season? Do you believe, as I do, that their current crop of forwards is "too soft" to compete against the more physical teams in the league?

In goal, Raycroft has had his ups & downs, but bottom line, his save percentage is poor and he's been awful in shootouts where many points are won and lost nowadays. Should the Leafs look for another starter, or find an experienced back-up (Cujo?) who can mentor Raycroft and provide some quality minutes?
Dave Owens, Regina

A: I don’t think the Leafs are too soft up front. I think they aren’t skilled enough or fast enough and, of course, big skilled players are always better than small skilled players in a rugged league like the NHL. If by too soft you mean they don’t have many fighters up front, I’d agree, but they have some big bodies with an ability to crash the net and cycle the puck. They just don’t have enough consistent scorers.

Regarding Peca, I’d bring him back at less than his current $2.5 million salary if he’s interested.

Regarding the goaltending situation, this is about buying time for Justin Pogge and hoping he’ll be the real deal. Pogge won’t be ready next year, and Raycroft is in the second year of a three year deal. Bringing in Joseph for one year to play, say, 30 per cent of the games would improve the Leafs at their weakest position. By the 2008-09 season, Pogge might be ready after two full years in the minors.

 

---

Q: I was reading the Leafs should have about $10 million to spend next year on free agents. In your opinion, does it makes sense to spend the majority of that money on a top-end player and then see who else is out there or would it make sense to sign a couple of players who make about $4-$5 million a season?

What is the Leafs' most pressing need in the off-season?

Will Mike Peca re-sign for a reasonable amount in Toronto? And, how much money do you think Ryan Smyth will command at free agency this summer? I'd love to see him in a Leaf uniform, but not if he's going to cost $6 million or higher a season. Thanks!
Chris Clay, Mississauga

A: See, I don’t think you can pick out one player and say, he’s worth only this amount or that amount. The concept has to be to identify the players that would best fit your roster and then identify what the market price is. Many complain about Pavel Kubina being a $5 million defenceman, or not being one, but the fact is there were a number of other clubs offering the same money. The Leafs identified the player and paid the going rate, for better or worse.

The trick over the course of the month of June will be for John Ferguson Jr. (JFJ) to try and find out what each player would cost, and then be prepared to move as quickly as possible – and as aggressively as possible – on the players he wants.

This is the summer he needs to score big.

 

---

Q: With the now apparent glut of centres (Green, Perrault, Peca, Pohl, Sundin, Wellwood, Steen, etc. who doesn't come back next year or gets moved to wing?

Also, how do you see Harrison and Kronwall's future shaking out?
Michael Nestlehut, Harper Woods, Michigan

A: I would imagine Green and Perreault won’t return, the latter particularly if he’s looking for $2 million per season or more. Peca, as I mentioned above, would likely be welcome back at a lower salary. After that, Sundin’s a clear No. 1 centre, but the others all look like wingers – particularly if you include Matt Stajan – or third-line centres.

That’s why centres like Drury, Daniel Briere, Scott Gomez or even Keith Tkachuk will have appeal to the Leafs.

Harrison still has an outside shot. Kronwall is still very much in the team’s plans, but he hasn’t been able to stay healthy.

 

---

Q: This season, JFJ makes a questionable trade for Raycroft, giving up a promising prospect. Then signs Raycroft before his first regular season game to a multi-year contract, which he is proving not to have deserved.

So, how much pressure is JFJ putting on Maurice to make him play his off-season acquisition game in and game out?

Why can't JFJ accept his mistake, like Muckler in Ottawa, playing the much better Emery, who they already had, over the veteran Gerber, acquired to be their No. 1?

And I don't care if Raycroft breaks Belfour's record for single season wins. Belfour had 37 wins in 62 games. Raycroft has already played 62 games, and his 32 wins include a few shoot out winners Belfour didn't have the same chance for. If Raycroft had had 40 wins in 62 games, I might have been impressed.
Andrew Barrie, Toronto

A: Well, as far as I can tell, your question appears to be whether JFJ is pressuring Maurice to play Raycroft, and whether the Leafs would be better off turning to Jean-Sebastien Aubin down the stretch and as the club’s No. 1 goalie.

On those two questions, I would say no and no.

A more significant question, however, is whether Ferguson may have to admit a mistake on Raycroft this summer, either by going out and getting a better netminder or by acquiring a masked man capable of challenging Raycroft.

The end to this season may determine that.

 

---

Q: Damien, I understand that most of your questions regard the Leafs, but I have a question about the Habs. Here's a team managed and coached by three "heart and soul" former players: Bob Gainey, Guy Carbonneau and Kirk Muller. All of these guys were the type of players who would sacrifice anything to block a shot or score a goal.

What I can't figure out is why they don't have any players of that calibre in their current lineup. I was really hoping they'd try to grab Ryan Smyth, a player cut from their own cloth, but it didn't materialize.

What's going on with the Habs over the last few years?
Rick Flanagan, Memphis

A: I think the Habs do have some of the players you describe, Saku Koivu for one, perhaps further down the lineup a player like Steve Begin. Could they use more? Definitely. One of the problems I believe teams are experiencing is identifying the prototypical team capable of succeeding in the “new” NHL. Should it be small and fast like Buffalo? Bigger and meaner like Anaheim? This stuff is still flushing itself out, and Montreal seems one of the teams caught in the transition. Moreover, they have a lot of young players, and often those kinds of players don’t fully define themselves until later in their careers. Maybe the Habs have more “heart and soul” players than you think, but they’re just not mature ones yet.

 

---

Q: I recently read one of your articles indicating that possible expansion in the NHL is on the horizon. Considering there are no true hockey markets left in the U.S., coupled with the fact NHL ratings in the States are for the most part abysmal, why would this even garner any kind of consideration? Perhaps you were alluding to expansion in Canada? This is the only option that makes sense to me. Can you please elaborate?
James N., Courtice, Ont.

Q: Let me give you the NHL’s viewpoint first. The Bettman administration would argue there are other markets such as Houston, Seattle, Kansas City and maybe even Las Vegas, and its spokesmen would also tell you its national TV package is a project still in development.

Just like its been for 40 years.

Now let's look at hockey reality.

Expansion on its own is a terrible idea because the players just aren't there, and more expansion to the U.S. is an even more terrible idea. But you can bet the NHL is looking at it, if only because expansion dollars don’t have to be shared with the players under the terms of the collective bargaining agreement.

This is a league that added nine teams in nine years. Caution and logic has never defined the NHL’s expansion policy, not now, not back in ’67 when they doubled the size of the league and stuck all the new teams in one division to render the Stanley Cup final a joke for several years.

Click here to send Damien a question and he'll answer a selection in his mail bag every Thursday in this space.

 

Code in Chaos

In the infamous words of Strother Martin, what we have here is failure to communicate.

As absolutely confused as I was in the wake of the Chris Neil non-suspension, Cam Janssen suspension and Chris Simon mega-suspension as to how and why NHL justice is dispensed, the five-game ban handed down to Nashville forward Jordin Tootoo just adds to the mystification.

That's not to defend Tootoo. What he did was not hockey.

But the problem is if Tootoo has been paying attention to NHL decision makers this season, he could be forgiven if he was under the distinct impression that what he did was part of hockey.

Or at least that he was conducting himself appropriately under the overall philosophy under which the league operates.

Don't forget, in January NHL general managers told the hockey world that they believed that an important element of their sport was the ability of certain players to exact their own form of justice on the ice if they believed their talented teammates were being unduly abused by opposition players.

In order to let the league's enforcers "do their job," the GMs recommended that the number of times such players could initiate fights and incur an instigator penalty before suspension should be raised to five games from three.

In other words, the GMs were saying if star players are being abused, or allegedly abused, we want other players to have the opportunity to start fights as a method to halt that abuse.

We won't quibble with the logic for the moment. But that's basically the message the GMs sent out.

So when Tootoo hit Mike Modano of the Dallas Stars with a legal check, he knew that the league had reinforced the concept that other Dallas players could seek retribution on the ice right then and there.

So he got himself ready.

And when poor old Stephane Robidas arrived, Tootoo delivered a knockout blow with one punch.

Robidas came to initiate a fight with the tactic encouragement of the league that such a move was the proper way to respond, and Tootoo beat him to the punch.

So he gets a five-game suspension?

More than Neil? More than Janssen?

As far as I can follow the idiotic "code," Tootoo followed it to the letter.

He hit a star player. He knew he would have to answer the bell for doing so, and he was more than ready and willing to scrap.

According to league discipline master Colin Campbell, Tootoo's haymaker was "an overly aggressive and inappropriate response."

It wasn't that he delivered a punch. Just too good of a punch.

To which Nashville's  GM David Poile told The Tennessean, "It's a confusing situation to me to exactly what is right or wrong."

No kidding.

The NHL constantly tells the sports world that fighting is part of the game, that punching another player in the head as part of an altercation is an important element in the sport.

It also says that players must have some ability to protect their teammates.

Look, I think what Tootoo did was reprehensible and has no place in the sport.

But under the rules of engagement as laid down by the NHL, I find it completely illogical to point the finger at him for somehow stepping beyond the bounds of the game.

But then, this really isn't about logic, is it?

Nor is it really about hockey.

The Wrong Focus?

It's just sad, really.

The Carleton University men's basketball team accomplished something truly extraordinary over the weeking, winning a fifth consecutive national championship.

And it's like nobody noticed.

Meanwhile, many Canadians buy into the phony hype of March Madness, fill out pool forms and fret over the seedings before the NCAA men's tournament begins, let alone the actual results.

UNLV beating Wisconsin is suddenly significant news. Let's get wall-to-wall analysis on that one.

But five straight for the Ravens? Yawn.

It's something, really, that is the fault of all of us in the mainstream Canadian sports media for not doing a better job telling the stories of teams like the Ravens and their players.

But do we do a lousy job of that because people don't care?

Or do people not care because we do such a lousy job of it?

Don't know the answer to that one. I can guess that a group of young men in Ottawa, while thrilled with their victory, are probably wondering why their extraordinary accomplishment will create no buzz in Canada.

Meanwhile, the exploits of Winthrop, Gonzaga and Middle This-or-That State are reported as major news.

I don't know how this changes, and maybe Canadian university sports exists at the level it should, of interest to those who play and their families and those interested in university sport.

But when it comes to the Carleton Ravens five-peat, it's just sad.

The Ever-Changing Truth

Pete Rose is like a kid who just broke a window.

Desperately, he's trying to come up with the right answer to give to the adults who aren't too happy with the window situation.

Denial sure didn't work. Got him banned from baseball.

Bravado? Nope. Pretending not to care? Didn't work either.

Now, based on a radio interview, Rose is willing to say whatever anybody wants him to say if it'll get him reinstated and maybe into Cooperstown.

Bet on my own team? Every day! Twice on Sundays!

In Rose's mind, this paints him only guilty of being a manager who loved too much.

As always, it then seems to catch him by surprise when the rest of the baseball world doesn't quite share his viewpoint.

In this case, for starters, it only confirms him as an unrepentant liar when, long after the fact, he acknowledges that the facts of the Dowd report were basically bang on.

And betting on your own team? What could possibly be wrong with that?

Well, lots.

With money in the balance, there's the issue of how a manager might choose to handle his pitching staff or any injuries his team might have.

Morever, since 162 bets per season seems unlikely, what was he telling other bettors when he didn't lay down a few bucks?

Then, of course, there's the relatively minor detail of this all being strictly verboten by the lords of baseball.

See, I've always believed that Rose should be on the Hall of Fame ballot, which he isn't, with the voters charged with that particular privilege then allowed to make the decision.

Given that which happened to Mark McGwire in the most recent round of balloting, I don't see Rose suddenly skating through.

But his other dream, of reinstatement to baseball and returning to the dugout, seems more far-fetched than ever.

He wants to come up with the right answer, not understanding that the time for that has long past.

It was probably back when the Dowd Report was originally produced.

Or maybe when Jim Gray asked him to come clean on national television.

But saying now that he bet and bet and bet on his own Reds isn't going to come close to getting it done.

One wonders if McGwire is watching, possibly thinking of revising his own stonewalling strategy.

Mail bag

Every Thursday, Damien Cox answers your Maple Leafs questions. Click here to send Damien a question.

Q: Watching the Leafs PP this year has been sad. Why didn't they pick up Allison who scored 80% of his points on the PP? Use him as a PP specialist and keep his 5-on-5 minutes down. I can't help thinking the Leafs would be in a much better seed if only a few more PP goals were scored. With the PP dictating games these days I can't believe teams haven't thought of having PP specialists. Your thoughts about this role?

Don Bai, Toronto

A: Well, I think to believe you could just sign Allison today and he’d be an effective player is a bit of a stretch. It would take him a while to get up to speed, and he was never a fast player in the first place.

There would be cap considerations, as well, plus waiver considerations. I’ve rarely seen teams carry players solely to use on the power play, particularly forwards. It’s just too hard to jump into the game mid-stream.

Allison would not be a player, in my opinion, that would flourish under Paul Maurice. His tendencies are all offensive, he would tend to turn the puck over in dangerous parts of the ice and I don’t think he would fit in the quick transition, quick puck movement game that Maurice endorses. I think the final nail in Allison’s coffin, as a Leaf anyway, was how well the team played and with more jump and zip when he went down for the season last year with an injury.

That said, I am surprised somebody didn’t sign him. Guess the Leafs weren’t completely out of their minds to cut him loose.

---

Q: Mr. Cox - What chance, if any, do you give the notion that if Ted Saskin is forced out of the NHLPA, Bob Goodenow will return to the helm? Is it possible there could be a wave of support for him as the best man for the job at this time? He knows the players, the owners, the CBA, and Saskin's ouster would be a clear repudiation of the pro-Saskin (and pro - CBA settlement) movement that swept Goodenow out in the first place. Or did Goodenow burn too many bridges w/in the Union to return?

Todd Sloan, Phoenix

A: Well, for starters, Goodenow might know the owners, but they hated him as executive director and would not welcome his return. As far as knowing the CBA, Goodenow’s a very smart fellow and a strong negotiator, but let’s be clear; this was not his CBA, whether he understands it or not.

In terms of whether he could come back, the union’s politics at the moment are so divisive and antagonistic that it will be difficult to reach a consensus on the type of leader the players want anytime soon, let alone who that person might be.

Goodenow, you can’t imagine, would want to go through a long interview process for the job along with 10 or more other candidates, and that’s the process the players are intent on. He took his $8 million buyout (and I don’t think he’s giving it back). He’s gone. Goodenow has moved on, and so have the players.

---

Q: Hey Damien! Can you please explain to me the love-in everyone seems to be having with Paul Maurice? This team, on paper, is a better team than the one iced last year, yet is no further ahead when you look at the standings. PP and PK are both worse for wear (yes, injuries, but every team has injuries. And this time didn't have Mike Peca last year, so we can't use him as an excuse either). If I remember correctly, Paul has a losing coaching record. Please help me to understand how we are so much better off with Maurice behind the bench.

Ron Gillespie, Listowel, Ont.

A: Well, I’m not sure there’s a Maurice love-in yet. I think fans are waiting to see if he can mold a winner. As well, I’m not sure the roster has been particularly strengthened, except perhaps on the back end. You could even argue there’s less proven firepower up front. What John Ferguson was looking for was a more systematic approach than that which Pat Quinn favored, and he was impressed with the work Maurice did with the Marlies. Obviously, his familiarity with some of those ex-Marlies helped, and he has certainly been willing to give the likes of John Pohl, Kyle Wellwood, Carlo Colaiacovo, Ian White and Andy Wozniewski significant opportunity.

I agree that the inability to progress on special teams is to some degree a reflection on the coaching staff. At the same time, I believe this team’s resiliency this year and its ability to play well on the road are also considerable strengths that are also reflections upon the coaching staff.

You’re correct – Maurice does have a losing record. And he also has a trip to the Stanley Cup final on his resume. How he does here in Toronto is going to define his NHL career, but less than a full season is way too early to reach a final judgement.

---

Q: Hi Damien,

Players such as John Pohl, Battes Battaglia and Boyd Devereaux have all come from the AHL last season to make the big club this year and have performed quite well for the Leafs.

With the salary cap restricting how much money teams have to spend, do you think general managers are going to look to bring in more minor-pro veterans from North America and the prominent European leagues who are willing to play for a lower salary to stock their 3rd and 4th lines?

That way, you have guys who you know can come in and be professional and give you solid minutes (unlike some young players who regress without quality ice-time and lots of chances to play) and also spend the majority of your cap dollars on the team's top-end players.

Chris Clay, Mississauga

A: Well, there are a lot of “buts” inherent in your suggestion. For starters, there’s a limit per AHL team of how many “veterans” you can carry. It’s not open-ended, although there’s some talk of changing the rules. As well, there can be waiver issues depending on a variety of factors, including salary.

Remember, for example, when Anaheim tried to promote goalie Michael Leighton earlier this year when they had injury problems in goal. Leighton was immediately lost on waivers.

Both Battaglia and Devereaux, on the other hand, were at a stage in their careers where they were looking more for opportunity than salary, so when the chance came to move up to the NHL from the Marlies they weren't held back because they were making too much and had to pass through waivers.

There are ways to get around the cap's financial restrictions by spending on your minor-league affiliate, but for the most part that is restricted to areas like coaching, training and facilities.

---

Q: Hey Damien,

A couple Saturdays ago some buddies of mine and I had a debate. Is or was Mats Sundin ever the right guy to build a franchise around? Now I used the typical argument that he's never had elite players around him. But here's what I was up against: Sundin has played with the likes of Gary Roberts (who put up a 30 goal or close to it season in Toronto), Mogilny (who also had some strong campaigns in blue and white), Stumpy Thomas and briefly Doug Gilmour. He's also recieved excellent goaltending from Cujo and one great season from Ed Belfour (both were nominated for Vezinas while in blue and white).

Yet he has never won a scoring race, or been nominated for a major award. Nor have the Leafs played in the Stanley Cup final. Personally, I love the guy. He's been incredibly loyal and the epitome of class even if the Leafs haven't always been. I did question his work ethic earlier in his career but I truly think he was a casualty of bad GM's. So I guess it's up to you to come up with the final say in our debate.

Was Mats Sundin legitmately a franchise player in the same vein as Sakic, Yzerman and Messier?

Joe Chistens, Pickering, Ont.

A: The answer to this enduring question is probably worth a book, not just a short answer in a mail bag.

Let’s break this down.

As a player, is Sundin the equal of the players you mentioned, Joe Sakic, Mark Messier or Steve Yzerman?

No. For the most part, he hasn’t been as prolific as an offensive player. But he has been very durable, and he has been very successful on the international stage, as well.

Is he an outstanding captain?

I would argue that he is. Almost universally his teammates respect and adore him, and he’s the kind of leader who truly cares about his teammates even though he may not express his sentiments through fiery public speeches.

Could you win a Stanley Cup with Sundin as your captain?

Absolutely. He’s every bit the measure of Rod Brind’Amour or Dave Andreychuk, the last two Cup-winning captains. Whether the Leafs do it with Sundin wearing the “C” has a great deal to do with how much he has left in the tank at age 36 – it appears quite a bit – and whether in a new cap system the Leaf management team can put together a strong enough roster.

To me, then, he’s a franchise player. Such players come in all shapes and sizes, and while many hold Messier up as the greatest leader, remember that he didn't make the playoffs for the final seven years of his career. Sakic, meanwhile, played with Peter Forsberg, Rob Blake and Patrick Roy when all those players were in their prime, and I don't think Sundin has had teammates of that calibre since he became a Leaf.

---

Q: Damien,

I was just reading your comment on Sundin where you stated the Leafs' "plan is to scrap the option year of his current contract and sign him to a new arrangement that will reduce that cap number for the next two or three seasons". It is my understanding that, under the terms of the new CBA, if the Leafs decline Sundin's option they cannot resign him for one year. This clause is obviously to prevent teams from circumventing the salary cap. So the Leafs either pick up Mats‘ option and take the cap hit or say good-bye to their captain. Is this not the case?

Chris D, Toronto

A: Chris, this is a very complicated business without an easy answer. For starters, you are incorrect, there is no CBA provision that says they cannot re-sign him to a new deal for a year if they decline his option.

Option years, you should know, are no longer allowed, partly because they are confusing as in the case of Sundin, and there are transition rules from the old CBA to the current one as to how option years can be dealt with.

In terms of Sundin’s deal, the Leafs could actually negotiate with him now, but they if they reached a new arrangement they could then face a cap adjustment (upwards) immediately, which could be a problem. For that reason, they want to wait until the playoffs begin – the cap disappears – or after the season so as not to affect their 2006-07 cap figure.

After that, Leaf officials say the option year effectively just “drops away” if that’s the club’s intention, and they can then pay any buyout figure (which would have cap implications) and then negotiate a new one-year deal or multi-year arrangement.

The key for the Leafs is to try to find a way to help their cap figure, which currently sits at $6.3 million for Sundin. Both sides appear willing to find an accommodation to make this happen.

Click here to send Damien a question.