Missing The Point II

For the second time this fall, there's a storm over a story and I'm apparently missing the point.

First it was Bill Belichick and SpyGate. I understood that he was breaking rules; I just also understood that stealing the other guy's signals was what every team was trying to do on a regular basis.

Or why would they need secret signals?

Now everybody's up in arms about Sean Avery after Saturday night's Rangers-Leafs game, and to be sure, this is a juicy story.

But outrage? I don't think so.

Peel away all the rhetoric and here's what you have: two guys pushed and shoved during the pre-game warmup, said nasty things to each other and then fought during the first period.

Big deal.

And don't tell me that Avery may have said something particularly awful. Folks, these players say terrible things to each other every night. To say trashing another player's family is out-of-bounds is laughable - saying ugly things about an opponent's wife or girlfriend is standard NHL fare.

That stuff goes on in baseball, basketball and football as well, and we all remember the World Cup incident that motivated Zidane to go headbutt-crazy against the Italians. But the NHL is the only league that routinely allows all the extracurricular stuff, all the face-washing and wrestling after the whistle and screaming at opponents in the penalty box.

In fact, it tacitly endorses it, and when it explodes into full-blown fights, well, the NHL has made it clear it believes this is good for business.

So re-discovering religion when it comes to Avery's antics just doesn't wash, particularly when it comes from a trash-talker like Darcy Tucker or a paid enforcer like Wade Belak.

I might say this stuff is bush-league and moronic. But there's just nothing out of the ordinary here as far as what the NHL allows and many hockey people celebrate, and to use the pro-fighting argument, I'm sure there were lots of people standing at the ACC on Saturday night during the warmup, hoping for a brawl to erupt. And to the fight people, the fact that people watch is all that matters. Was Don Cherry upset at the pre-game silliness on Saturday? Sure he was. But he cheers for the Leafs and calls Tucker a friend. Whose side do you think he's going to take?

Tom Renney just laughed on Saturday night when told Tucker had called Avery "classless," mostly because he coached Tucker with the Kamloops juniors and won a Memorial Cup with him and could tell all kinds of stories about Tucker and trash-talking and pre-game scuffles.

Sure, Avery's a creep. But there's a long history of those types of irritating players in the NHL going back to the days of Bugsy Watson. And while Belak tried to twist this into an argument about getting rid of the instigator, the fact is that Avery does drop the gloves and fight. A lot. In fact, a lot more than Tucker ever has, even back in his Sideshow Bob days.

Like SpyGate, this is a good story, a juicy one. But meaningful it is not, nor is it one to get all worked up about.

(Ed. note: Based on a few of the comments here, people seem to have already decided that Avery said something about Blake and cancer. Nothing has been proven. Moreover, Tucker was giving as good as he got in the verbal end of things during the pre-game, and it was he who waved his stick in Avery's face. Why is Tucker automatically the innocent here?)

Who's Next?

Much of hockey-loving Canada was left with the same question after Hockey Night in Canada's 10-hour marathon on Saturday.

Who the hell is P.J. Stock, and has anyone ever absorbed so much air time and said so very little?

But that was but a small blemish on what was a terrific Hall of Fame weekend, with Ron Francis, Al MacInnis, Scott Stevens and Mark Messier to be inducted Monday night, along with builder Jim Gregory.

As soon as that august group is installed, the chatter will almost immediately turn to next year and another intriguing discussion over who deserves to be honoured next.

So let's get ahead of that discussion, shall we?

Well, for starters it's time for a woman. Past time, really, and hopefully they'll get this ball rolling next year. Pick one of Shirley Cameron, Geraldine Heaney, Cammi Granato, Angela James, France St. Louis - whoever.

And for the rest?

Well, Igor Larionov should be a slam dunk. In fact, he should have been inducted this year. Only Mark Messier, really, had greater credentials, and the way in which the Hall of Fame selection process is still shrouded in complete and impenetrable secrecy makes it difficult to understand how the great Russian wasn't selected.

But, happily, his wait should only last a year.

Next, in my mind, should be former Edmonton sniper Glenn Anderson, one of the best big-game scorers in NHL history. There are suggestions personal grudges are behind this peculiar omission, which has gone on for several years, and again, the secret manner in which the votes are tabulated and nominations are made only adds to the speculation.

But Anderson was better than any number of the players who have been voted in recently, notably Bernie Federko and Clark Gillies.

Next year should be the year.

Finally, if you need a builder, then Lou Lamoriello should be your man. Not only has he won three Cups in New Jersey, he built a terrific college program in Providence and built the U.S. squad that stunned Canada at the 1996 World Cup.

Larionov, Anderson and Lamoriello, plus a deserving female. Then you'd have back-to-back outstanding classes of inductees.

In Praise of Pinball

Win or lose, let's hope Pinball stays.

Not just in football, although having Michael Clemons part and parcel of the Toronto Argonauts seems good for the sport and good for that team.

But let's hope that no matter what, he stays in Toronto.

That notion came to mind last night while reading the bizarre story of the Minnesota Vikings and receiver Troy Williamson. Williamson, according to reports, missed last week's Vikings game against San Diego - a Vikings win - in order to attend the funeral of his maternal grandmother, who was instrumental in raising him as a child.

He helped arrange the funeral, and aided in arranging travel plans for several dozen of his relatives, some of who are apparently in the military. He's also been dealing for weeks with the serious illness of his brother, who was injured in a September car accident and has been slipping in and out of a coma ever since.

So how did the Vikings handle this very, very personal situation? They docked Williamson a game day pay - about $25,000 - for choosing his family over the team.

Maybe there's some circumstance here that will come to light eventually that will make the Vikings appear more humane.

But on the surface, what a bunch of creeps.

Which brings us back to Pinball. If anything, he's put his reputation on the line by bringing in some dubious characters mostly because he believes in second, third and fourth chances, if necessary.

If one of his receivers were to find themselves in a similar situation? Not only would the player be excused, Pinball would probably help arrange the funeral himself and possibly attend with other members of the team.

I guess when you read a story like this one about the Vikings, a franchise that has disgraced itself repeatedly in recent years, you understand that having a real man, a man who has his priorities straight, is an incredible treasure for GTA sporting scene.

Maybe this is Pinball's last season coaching the Argos.

But let's hope its not his last year as a leader in this city.

Mail Bag

The good news for Maple Leaf fans is that tomorrow night, the Leafs will be visiting Buffalo to play a Sabres team that's actually struggling as much or more than they are so far in this young NHL season.

That's gotta be worth something. Or at least a little less worrying for the next 24 hours. Or at least it was before the Sabres knocked off the Bruins last night.

Never mind.

Now here's this week's mail bag.

Q: Damien,

Next year, Wellwood, Stajan, and Steen are all RFAs. If the Leafs are forced to spend a lot to retain/resign these three, plus Sundin, that doesn't leave much if any for a new free agent signing. With the rest of the team on 2 or more year contracts, that almost forces next year's team to be the same as this year’s. Does that put JFJ in a position where he almost has to trade this year to have any ability to change the roster next year? Thanks.

Brian Stefurak, Toronto

A: Interesting question. I'm not sure, for starters, I share the sense that those three young players will cost the Leafs a lot to re-sign. Not one has established themselves as a bona fide top-six forward, so I can't see any Penner-like offer sheets coming their way. It could happen, but it doesn't seem likely. All are making less than $1 million a season, and only Stajan seems likely at this point to hit the 20-goal mark. How the cost of those three should exceed $6 million next season at this point defies logic. The Leafs hold the hammer on all three as restricted free agents, and if an offer sheet comes along, they can always match.

That said, I think its clear the Leafs lack flexibility for next year if they maintain the current status quo. I think the number I've seen is that they're already committed to $42 million worth of payroll. If this season continues to go sour, there should be opportunities for them to throw some of that cap money overboard.

Q: Hi Damien,

I have a question that I'm surprised no-one has asked before, so I'll let you have a go at it.

If the penalty for going over the cap is a fine and not a docking of points, why are teams not willing to pay the fines to get the best possible team money can buy? I mean if the Leafs can make $80 million in profit last year and still have the gall to raise ticket prices, shouldn't they show the people who pad their bank accounts that they are serious about being a good team?

Jeff Foran, Markham

A: It doesn't work that way. They can't just go over the cap and pay the fines. If found to be over, the league would force them to comply with the cap immediately or they wouldn't be allowed to play. My understanding is any fine would be imposed if, at the end of the season, an audit shows a team has gone over the cap because of injury reserve players, bonuses or other unanticipated or unaccounted for costs.

Q: Damien,

As a relative newcomer to Hockey (and Canada - moved here from the UK in 1999) I used to think you were rather bitter and twisted about the Leafs in the same vein that Glen Healy is. But when I think back now and review 7 years of following the Leafs, I think I am much more on you wave length now (i.e. the rose tinted glasses are gone for good).

On to my thoughts - coming from UK Sports where there is no such thing as a salary cap and the richest teams are the best teams year in year out - its obviously not just players salaries that you can spend all your money on. The richest teams also employ the best scouts all over the world, they have the best playing facilities, the best coaching staff all the way down to the dude that gives your shoes a good polish. Anyway, so I think the most realistic jab we can make at MLSE is that they do not spend money wisely on everything else not classed as player salaries. With all the money, it should be the Leafs drafting the Zetterbergs and Datsyuks of the world due to the best scouting. It simple surely - who are the best scouts in the business - find them and offer to double their money and work for the Leafs. Not that simple of course - but my point is this. They should spend their millions where they can to improve on the on ice product. And they evidently don't. Thoughts?

Matthew Goff, Toronto

A: Well Matthew, you've obviously been here long enough to figure this business out. Why the Leafs don't do that is indeed a bit of a mystery, but they never have. In theory, they could identify the five best amateur and pro scouts in the game, double their salaries and be done with it. But that's not how they've gone about it, and that's the kind of issue one can bring up when challenged on the notion that Leafs ownership doesn't really pursue winning with all possible vigour.

Q: It is strange to see a team with such terrible defence having players in the top tier of the plus/minus ratings. Looking at the Leafs plus-minus ratings it would seem that their defence is being majorly let down by a brutal fourth forward line and an equally brutal third defensive pairing (take your pick of Stralman, White and McCabe). Is this too simplistic? I would be interested in seeing the stats for goals against by individual (as opposed to plus/mins); a simple sum of the number of even strength goals scored while each player is on the ice divided by his total 5 on 5 playing time. Seeing the outliers on a team would be instructive.

Patrick Smith, Vancouver

A: Agreed; on the Leafs it does seem a bit out of whack. That's where plus-minus can be a bit deceiving, however, so you've got to be careful sometimes and wait to see the numbers play out over at least half a season. Some players have to play against better opposing players, for example, or may be playing with linemates that can't score to save their lives.

That said, these Leaf plus-minus number are weird. Let's keep an eye on them and evaluate further before Christmas.

Q: Monsieur Cox,

Don't you think that all the “head-first-into-the-boards” checks are resulting from the players not being allowed to throw an arm around the guy they're checking without getting called for a hold? I think Burke was suggesting that under these circumstances the holding be allowed as a safety measure. Seems like it would be awfully tricky for the ref to make that judgement call - is it a “protection” hold or merely a convenient way of wrapping up the opponent. As one of the world's top 100 influences in the world of professional ice hockey - do you have any thoughts on this debate? One can sense it won't be long before we have a paralyzed NHLer.

Ross Maudsley, Toronto

A: Well, Monsieur Ross, you're clearly getting bad information if you categorize me in that field of 100 influential folks. I'm just trying to have a bit of influence on the hockey players in my own household.

It is a tricky area, but I think most hits from behind are just stupid, reckless plays, and if given the opportunity to apply a safety hold instead, most of those inclined to play this way would still execute a stupid, reckless play.

I think a two-minute boarding call for a hit from behind is just way too little. Give anyone guilty of such an offence an automatic major, game misconduct and five-game suspension, and I promise you the issue will disappear from the sport.

Q: Just a quick question about taxes on the salaries of Canadian teams. For example, does Mats Sundin lose half of his salary due to the Canadian Tax laws or does he get taxed in his home country of Sweden? If he does get taxed by Canadian standards then is it not a huge advantage for American Teams when negotiating salaries?

Jack Saraga, Halifax

A: It varies from player to player depending on their nationality, play of permanent residency, etc. It's a consideration when contracts are signed, to be sure, and I've been told by various agents that the difference between Canada and many U.S. jurisdictions is negligible.

Q: How long can the Desert Dogs hang on? There is an obvious revenue gap between the haves and have nots. I was in Phoenix last week on business and took in the Red Wings/Coyotes tilt. The arena could not have been more than 1/2 full, with the vast majority of the fans wearing Red Wings jerseys (The Detroit fans refer to the arena as Joe Louis West). The only games on the Coyotes schedule that are deemed premium are Red Wings games.

Our tickets were in the lower bowl (row O on the goal line) cost $55 (Our company's red seats at the ACC have a face value of $191!). This week the Coyotes sent us an email advertising the same seats we had for Detroit at $20. Why on earth is there not a team in Hamilton when the NHL is bleeding in the desert?

Richard Baillie, Oakville

A: I guess the answer is twofold. One, the Coyotes are part of a much larger real estate/commercial development play in the Glendale area, and so ticket prices and attendance figures really only show part of the reason that franchise is in Phoenix. Moreover, it's a large TV market that the league prefers to Hamilton. The Coyotes organization still insists that if it can ever ice a playoff quality team, the fan support will return, because at one point in time it actually was quite decent.

Q: Hello Damien!

Maybe you can shed some light on the responsibilities of the Leafs bench staff. Paul Maurice is the head coach, so ultimately he is responsible, but after him - who on the Leaf bench is in charge of the defence? Should Paul be looking for a better assistant squad? Maybe bring in a more savvy defensive specialist to help with the coaching/development of the defence corps? Obviously Paul knows how to get them to Run and Gun, just seems to have no idea how to get the to tighten up that back end.

Ron Gillespie, Listowel, Ont.

A: I think the basic concept is Randy Ladouceur looks after the D-men, Keith Acton is in charge of the forwards and Maurice co-ordinates the two, with Dallas Eakins in the press box as the eye-in-the-sky. Ladouceur and Maurice have been together since their Hartford days. Whether this very experienced coaching staff is good enough is, of course, rather up for debate these days. But adding more personnel likely would improve the situation.

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

Bell Work

So what's reasonable to expect from Mark Bell as he begins his Maple Leaf career tonight?

Not that being reasonable ever had anything to do with the Leafs when it came to public expectations.

The kid's big, he can skate and he's a former first round draft pick found wanting by two other clubs.

If he turns out to be Todd Warriner, that would be a modest return on the investment the Leafs made by agreeing to take Bell as part of the package that sent Vesa Toskala from San Jose to Toronto. Warriner, the fourth pick of the '92 draft, joined the Leafs in the Mats Sundin deal with Quebec and topped out at 12 goals in a season before ending his career in Finland, Switzerland and Germany.

He was helpful for a time.

But hang on here. Bell was the eighth pick of the '98 draft, but has already scored 20-plus goals twice as an NHLer.

So the expected return should be greater than Warriner, agreed?

If you're the Leafs, you've got to hope Bell can be something roughly equivalent to Alexei Ponikarovsky, hopefully without quite so many dumb hooking infractions in the offensive zone.

Ponikarovsky is a similar size to Bell, also skates well and has 21 goals in each of the past two seasons.

If Bell hits that level, then this trade starts to look like a winner. Indeed, if Bell can play at that level, it could save John Ferguson's job.

An intriguing question is how much slack Bell should be allowed given he'll be playing under the cloud of knowing he'll be going to jail at the end of the season.

Already, Jason Blake has played remarkably well under a more serious cloud, that of cancer. Blake has only scored twice, but he's been a consistent contributor.

We'll learn, I guess, whether Bell can put all that other stuff aside, focus on hockey as an escape and this chance in Toronto as, possibly, his last one as a NHLer. As least an NHLer with a big, one-way contract.

Sens Set For the Future

Well, there's not much debate anymore about who the Ottawa Senators are banking on to take them to the promised land.

Seven years, $49 million for Jason Spezza? Wow.

That's on top of the six-year, $45 million that's been committed to linemate Dany Heatley, and the smaller, multi-year pacts given last year to defencemen Chris Phillips and Anton Volchenkov.

Geez, and for that amount, you can barely afford buy Bryan McCabe, Tomas Kaberle and Pavel Kubina. Think about it.

What's amazing is that the Sens and owner Eugene Melnyk have committed those dollars to Heatley and now to Spezza without really being certain they can be the players who will deliver the Cup.

Neither performed particularly well in the one-sided loss to Anaheim in last spring's Stanley Cup final, but that was their first visit to that stage. Only the passage of time will tell if the Sens have bet on the right athletes.

But a lot of points and a lot of goals have landed these contracts for these players, and a franchise that a decade ago was a laughingstock is now viewed as both successful and a model organization.

The poor Leafs, huh? Their provincial cousins are soaring, across the lake in Buffalo the Sabres are a resourceful, smart and exciting team and down the 401 in Detroit the Red Wings are perennially a 100-point squad and Stanley Cup contender.

Those are tough neighborhood standards to meet.

Mail Bag

Well, the Maple Leafs may be struggling, but not so the loyal respondents to this week’s mail bag, who have generously supplied us with some intriguing and pointed questions. Let’s get right to it:

Q: Hi Damien,

I've relaxed , had my chamomile tea, and this team is not "hard to play against" as promised by Paul Maurice during the pre-season. I agree that JFJ has made some very poor signings and trades but I don't see how coach Maurice gets a free pass. This team looks unorganized on most nights and their lack of dicipline (too many bad penalities) are telltale signs of poor coaching. I don't see the veterans being held accountable for their poor performances (Sundin's -4 rating in the 3rd period against Chicago being a prime eg.) I remember a former Leaf coach named Burns who would demand better play or players would be watching from upstairs.

Mike Verdile, Thorold

A: Hard to argue with what you’re saying, Mike. I think Maurice has largely received a free pass, but then, that’s not totally unfair for a coach who hasn't even guided the team for 100 games yet. In terms of benching players for poor performance, he has continued the practice started under Pat Quinn of never using that as a motivational tool. The belief is that if you stick with a player, he’ll come through for you in the end. Problem is, for the Leafs, I believe that has created a culture in which veterans aren’t as accountable, particularly when they are cheered wildly and continue to be popular no matter what they do. Tie Domi and Darcy Tucker would be good examples. Bryan McCabe is certainly being held accountable by the fans, and I suppose you could say the coaching staff has, by giving Pavel Kubina more ice time than McCabe, held McCabe accountable to a certain extent.

But your points on penalties are well made – how many more offensive zone hooking penalties will Alexei Ponikarovsky take? – and Leaf special teams aren’t exactly spectacular. I think more and more, the attention will be turned to Maurice unless the team’s production this season picks up. But as I’ve said before, this is not just about JFJ, or Maurice, or McCabe, or ownership – this is a franchise that has dysfunction at multiple levels.

Q: Hey Damien,

I love the blog and this mailbag. Keep up the good work.

Leaf fans, media alike love to blame the fact that the Leafs are owned by some large, money hungry corporation. I personally am no fan of these guys, and pre-lockout, I would have been the first to point out that they don't want to commit. However, in the Cap era, what else can they do? They (the organization) are spending the max?

If Ted Rogers purhcased the Leafs tommorow, what good would it really do? It's not like he can spend more money on players.

Trying to take the blame off of where it belongs, JFJ and whoever signs off on his boneheaded moves seems silly. I don't think it was the Teachers union who signed McCabe.

Scott T., Waterloo, Ont.

A: Agreed. It’s not just about how much money they spend, although some teams – New Jersey, to name one – have been willing to dump expensive veterans in the minors (Alexander Mogilny, Dan McGillis) – when they deemed their production was flagging, and that requires ownership to bite the bullet on paying out a contract that in some cases no longer counts against the salary cap. Leaf ownership has not yet been willing to do that, although they were willing to buy out Domi and Ed Belfour. Also, spending on coaches and minor-league affiliates is essentially unlimited, so those are areas in which an organization with financial muscle can use it.

Otherwise, ownership in the NHL these days is about direction and about putting quality people in positions of authority and letting them make the necessary decisions. With regard to the Leafs, ownership hired Ferguson when he had no GM experience, then hamstrung him by making him right key decisions past the board and made him work with Quinn even though Quinn had been his predecessor. During the summer, there was a search for a “senior hockey man,” clearly a slap in the face to Ferguson, and then the club backtracked on a promise to extend his contract. That last point, clearly, means he has to think about now more than the future. That doesn’t mean Ferguson shouldn’t be held accountable for his decisions, good and bad. It means ownership has to bear some responsibility for putting him in a difficult position. They hired him, they constructed the curious environment in which he has to work.

This has been a jumbled situation for a decade, since Cliff Fletcher left, really. Ken Dryden took control, built a strange four-headed management team that didn’t work, and then when Quinn became GM/coach, Dryden spent his time trying to get Bob Gainey hired as GM. Ownership is ultimately responsible for everything, and they have allowed the Leaf front office to be a quagmire for a long time.

Q: Hi Damien,

I've read a lot of articles as of late that suggest the Toronto Maple Leafs are a money hungry organization that will never put a good team on the ice until they have to. While I partially agree I would like to know why it's possible for other teams to make money yet care about their overall product. The Yankees and Red Sox make obscene amounts of money, why do they care so much?

David B., Kingston

A: Great question. And now that we know the Leafs make a 22 per cent profit on revenues as revealed in an excellent story last weekend by The Star’s Rick Westhead, it would be interesting to see whether George Steinbrenner’s return on the Yankees and John Henry’s return on the Red Sox equals or exceeds that figure.

It’s too simplistic to say Leaf ownership doesn’t care. I think they’d like to win, but don’t know how or aren’t willing to make the necessary expenditures and sacrifices necessary to produce a winner. Having guaranteed profits and full houses just gives the Leaf board of directors a nice cushion to work with, and other than Larry Tanenbaum, it’s not their money backing the team anyway. Both Steinbrenner and Henry, meanwhile, have proven they can apply the formula to win championships, and they are clearly men who very much put their personal pride and ego on the line. Most people never see the Leaf directors; they’re mostly a nameless, faceless group of suits representing other companies who own the Leafs.

Q: Hi Damien:

One area I think the Leafs really need to address is veteran leadership in that dressing room - I feel that these lazy performances and late game collapses starts with the veterans who have been idolized in this city for years, and frankly have lost a competitive edge.

For example, Gary Roberts showed up every game and had a Cup ring to show for it. I'm sure that kind of tenacity rubs off on younger team mates. And there are 3 veterans sitting at home right now without contracts that could be added for paltry dollars who could help the younger guys develop on and off the ice. Anson Carter had 33 goals 2 years ago playing with the Sedin's and is not playing. Danny Markov was a terrific defenceman for us who never had his effort questioned (unlike the Kubina's of the world), always had a great +/- (+25 with Detroit last season) and he's not playing. And finally, Jeff Friesen (a former 40+ point per year man and great competitor when he was with the Sharks / Devils) could inject some credibility in our veteran leadership (has a Stanley Cup Ring) and help some of our young talent develop every night.

Even if they bomb, they'd still cost about 1/3 of McCabe's salary, but could add a whole lot more. Thoughts?

Will McG, Toronto

A: I think you have to be careful with this kind of stuff because sometimes what we see on the surface doesn’t reflect what’s really going on inside a team. Markov, as you know, has now signed in Russia, and I can’t see Carter or Friesen making the kind of difference you talk about. I don’t either is regarded as a strong veteran leader.

I do wonder, however, about the Leaf veteran core. Specifically, they’ve changed everything else – the coaches, the goalies, the support players – and only the core of Mats Sundin, Bryan McCabe, Tomas Kaberle and Darcy Tucker remains in place from the Quinn years. At some point, you have to acknowledge that group isn’t taking you where you want to go.

Q: Hi Damien;

It's not big as it use to be, but as a quick survey of the top 50, still 25% of NHLers are from Ontario. So - How much is the influence of all those mothers, brothers, sisters and aunts, etc etc sitting in Air Canada Centre have on incoming teams?

To me all incoming teams all have a 6th player on the ice, with 25% of players playing their A+ game, just to impress their dads.

Ron Kirby, St. John's, Nfld.

A: You’re not wrong. This has been the case for years whether it was Maple Leaf Gardens or the Air Canada Centre. But the same applies to a greater or lesser extent to all the Canadian cities, doesn’t it? When Vinny Lecavalier goes to Montreal, he’s pumped. Moreover, if these Ontario boys are inspired by getting to play in Toronto or on Hockey Night in Canada, you’d like to think the Leafs could put together a group of players who would be equally inspired.

Q: Damien: I was surpised to see that you missed the more devious point concerning the Taveres to the Marlies scam. The idea that they would move Taveres from the GMC, where he is drawing big crowds, to the Ricoh where he hopefully starts to draw bigger crowds, struck me as just a little cynical considering that MLSE gets a large fee for managing the Oshawa facility. Nice bit of managing (the GMC lost money in its first year of operation, incidently).

As a teacher, it’s embarassing to have a firm that one's pension plan owns, to be once again implicated in a scam involving a publicly financed building that they have their greedy paws all over. Need I remind you of the list? The aforementioned Richo centre, the Lions Club practice facility and of course, BMO field. Having part ownership in this organization that seems to love bilking municipalities out of their taxpayer funded facilities while our union campaigns hard for better government funding of public services, is almost as embarassing as when the pension plan owned a certain right-wing rag of a Toronto newspaper.

Rick Norman, Oshawa, Ont.

A: I have no problem with the teacher’s pension fund maximizing the return for their investors and clients. I just think its goals and needs are distinctly at odds with those necessary to run a championship NHL team. Outside of those who actually have a stake in the fund, most everyone would be happier if they got out of the hockey business entirely.

Q: When did Craig Button leave the Leafs, and why?

Tom Davis, Oakville

A: Button left last summer. The details are sketchy, but I don’t think it was a friendly parting. My understanding is that Button clashed with Ferguson on various internal matters, but neither has publicly explained the details. But it was a firing, not a mutual parting.

Q: I am a huge Leafs fan but I need to understand after witnessing the Ryan Smyth cry fest in Edmonton the other night, why he did not sign with the Oilers in the off-season? Obviously money was no object - Penner? He loves the city, the city loves him, so why Colorado? Also, why was he never made team captain? Captains Gilmour and Clark were the Leafs! He was(is) the Oilers.

Glen McMinn, Halifax

A: Two things. One, this was one of those cases when a decision is made – in this case, trading Smyth to the Islanders at the trade deadline – there’s no going back because so many bitter feelings were created.

Jason Smith was made captain of the Oilers back in ’01 when Smyth was only 25, so I guess the Oilers believe Smith was a better choice at the time and he proved to be a worthy captain.

When it came to money, the Oilers clearly believe spending $21.5 million over five years on the 25-year-old Dustin Penner was a better long-term decision than spending $31.25 million over the same five year players on a player who is six years older. Really, it was a dollar decision over very different commodities.

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