Pronger grounded, and Thursday mailbag

So did the NHL get it right?

Suspending Chris Pronger for one game - Game 5 tonight against Anaheim - is certainly a significant loss for the Ducks. Anaheim GM Brian Burke protested strenuously, as he should, but ultimately it was hard for anybody to dismiss the image of a dazed, bleeding Tomas Holmstrom lying on the ice.

Maybe the NHL weighed its own errors into the decision. The refereeing crew did, after all, finger the wrong Anaheim player, kicking Rob Niedermayer out of the game.

Burke could have argued, then, that the Ducks were essentially being punished twice for the same transgression. Well, he could have tried, anyway, but then again, maybe Colin Campbell's first impulse was a two-game suspension and he made it one because of the refereeing error.

So the Ducks are unhappy and Pronger is missing a big game.

Still, in a larger sense, if you believe suspensions should be designed as a deterrent against future behavior, its hard to believe much was accomplished.

Remember Alexander Radulov of Nashville receiving a one game ban in the first round for running Steve Bernier of the Sharks head first into the glass? Did that change a thing? Of course not.

The NHL will continue to have these dangerous hits in its game until it takes a much, much stronger stand against them such as minimum suspensions, regardless of time or place.

Something like any hit from behind is an automatic game misconduct and five-game suspension. You'd be amazed how such plays would go the way of the dinosaur.

It's the same with highsticking. As long as a pitchfork to the face is penalized the same as a hook in the neutral zone, players are going to govern themselves accordingly. Watch the way in which Buffalo's Toni Lydman was wielding his lumber at head height in the third period of Game 4 against Ottawa on Wednesday night. The stick caught Sens forward Chris Neil dangerously in the face, and Lydman received all of a two minute minor for the incident.

Make that five and a game everytime and it disappears from the sport.

So sure, making Pronger sit for a game was at least a reaction of some kind from a league that often lets such things go.

But it won't change anything.

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: Mr. Cox,

After the good news concerning the recovery of Karel Pilar, it was reported that he would be on the roster for the Czech team at the Worlds. Yet, I see no mention of him in the stats. Any word on that situation?

W. Koopman, Olympia, WA

A: He never made it onto the Czech's official roster and didn’t play at the worlds. His future is unclear, but the Leafs are interested in taking another look at him next season, perhaps under a two-way deal so that if he can't play any higher than the Marlies, it won't be costly. That might be hard for Pilar to swallow, however, and he might look for a better, more lucrative deal in Europe.

Q: Hi Damien.

In order, how would you rank the top 5 goalies whom you would consider to be the greatest ever to wear a Leaf's sweater?

Michael Armour, Dubai

A: Wow. Well, this is very, very tough because so many of the most prominent goalies in Leaf history only played a part of their careers, and sometimes a very small part, in Toronto.

Given that, I would start with Terry Sawchuk and move to Johnny Bower. Next would be Ed Belfour, but that would include his body of work before he played for the Leafs, which should get him into the Hall of Fame.

Ditto for Grant Fuhr. Then we’d probably go to Turk Broda, although that was well before my time.

So that’s five – Sawchuk, Bower, Belfour, Fuhr and Broda - but it doesn’t include Bernie Parent, Jacques Plante, George Hainsworth, Lorne Chabot or Harry Lumley, all of whom played between one and five seasons with the Leafs.

Q: Hey DC,

There has been much in the way of "building around youth" talk whenever someone defends JFJ's personnel decisions. I find that quite ironic given these same people overlook the situation he has put the team in with respect to the development of blueline assets. With McCabe, Kubina, and Gill unmovable due to overmarket valued contracts, Kaberle unmovable because he is too valuable and with Colaiacovo and White seemingly pegged to fill out the top six, one has to wonder how it is going to be possible for the Leafs to provide their developing defencemen with any NHL experience in the next two seasons (barring injury of course). Bearing this and the fact that the Marlies performed so poorly last year, do you see JFJ moving some blueline assets he cannot provide NHL icetime to in order to build depth in the forward ranks? Thanks for your time.

Nigel Bose, Toronto

A: Two points. One, assuming those contracts are all unmovable is not correct. Every team has players eating up too much of their cap space or that they would like to move, and every team has players with no-trade clauses that would wave those rights under certain circumstances, as we saw at the trade deadline.

Second, the whole point of having veterans is to give younger players time to learn the trade in the minors. White and Colaiacovo are the only two blueliners who have proven they can play at the NHL, so there’s no need to make room quite yet. If the newly signed Anton Stralman or Staffan Kronwall makes a huge statement in training camp, you worry about making room then. But you still need between six and eight NHL calibre defencemen, at least, and you can’t say the Leafs even have that yet. Moreover, they moved Brendan Bell to get Yanic Perreault, so they don’t really have more bodies to spare to strengthen themselves up front, although I’m sure they’d consider any deal.

Q: What is the logic to giving John Ferguson an extension? Won’t it be wise to let the current contract expire and then if they make the playoffs resign him and if not just hire someone else - I doubt the players will play any different knowing he is a so called 'lame duck' GM. I fear it will be like when the Raptors gave Lenny Wilkens that big extention and fired him the next year and had to pay for 2 more years.

Andrew Stevens, Toronto

A: You’re not wrong. But if you let Ferguson go into next season with just one year, it will be an issue all season long. In a major media market like Toronto, that can be a significant problem. Moreover, it seems unreasonable to ask a GM to patiently build with you, but then tell him you don’t have the confidence in him to give him a longer term deal.

Q: Damien,

Here is something I simply do not understand. Why can we not have a second NHL team in the GTA? Is it about protected regions or markets? If so, how is it that New York State has three teams? Exactly where do those said markets start and end? Clearly Toronto proper let alone Etobicoke, Scarborough, Hamilton, Kitchener etc could support NHL teams. Why has no one tried to get a second team in this obviously ample market?

Moe Green, Austin, TX

A: Simple. Leafs have territorial rights within 50 miles. Compensating them for those rights at the price they would demand would make a new franchise unprofitable. The Devils compensated the Rangers when they moved to New Jersey from Colorado, and the Islanders probably did as well as an expansion team, although that’s a little foggier. At any rate, the Leafs would probably want $100 million to start. They don’t want any competitition in the market, period. They didn’t even want Eugene Melnyk to operate a junior team out of Maple Leaf Gardens and refused to sell it to him.

Q: Damien, I have a real problem with icing in the NHL.

Icing usually occurs when a team finds themselves in trouble, and that trouble is usually the result of great play by the attacking team. To ice the puck while under attack breaks up the attack and the attacking teram is sort of punished by the break in play.

Some poor defenseman still has to skate the length of the ice to touch the puck. Valuable seconds are lost due to icing, especially when a team is trying to tie a game in the dying seconds. Additionally, while the player is skating back to get the puck, the defenders are already beginning to rest. Then they rest waiting for the faceoff. It seems to me that the team who has to chase the puck loses in the whole deal. Momentum is lost.

Let's make icing the puck a penalty. 2 minutes for icing. Make teams play their way out of trouble. That would be better for the game. I know that the league has brought in a new icing regulation, defenders can’t change their line-up, but they're usually well rested by the time the puck is dropped again.

Rick Flanagan, Memphis

A: I hear what you’re saying, but I like the new rule and wouldn’t support calling for a minor penalty – which would just allow the team to ice the puck with impunity. Forcing them to play on with tired players is a good compromise.

Q: Hi Damien,

Since you appear on "The Reporters," you must know Steve Simmons from the Toronto Sun quite well. Since he was clearly wrong regarding his Mats Sundin story, and even said on "Off The Record" that he would issue an apology if he was wrong, perhaps you can shed some light as to why no apology has been given. Is it that he plans to make one publicly on TV or what? I do not think it is fair that he essentially lied to everyone, wrote a false story, and is not punished or anything. This shows a complete lack of journalistic integrity and illustrates that he has no credibility as a writer. Where is our apology?

Max Zakrzewski, Toronto

A: You’ll have to ask Mr. Simmons. I’d rather not comment too directly because I think its unprofessional. I would only say I would hope The Star would at least insist on getting comment from the people directly involved before publishing such a controversial piece. Other than that, it’s the Sun’s business what they put in their paper, and the readers will judge.

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