Thursday Mail Bag

No surprise that a wild week in the Leaf kingdom last week produced lots of questions and suggestions for the new regime.

Something tells me this isn’t going to stop, either. With less than four weeks to go to the trade deadline, names and possibilities are going to be popping up every day. Should be fun.

Now on to this week’s mailbag:

Q: Hey Damien,

With all the names swirling around as the permanent GM for the Leafs would that potentially cause problems at the trade deadline? For instance say the Leafs trade Sundin to the Ducks for the oilers first rounder and come the off season, Brian Burke happens to take the leafs post (though he is denying it) wouldnt that look a bit suspect? Are there any rules regarding this?

George B., Kitchener

A: There are no rules regarding the movement of managers. While I agree there’s room for suspicion, no deal for a new Leaf executive would be in place prior to Feb. 26th, so there should be no real reason for a conflict of interest scenario.

Q: Hi Damien. All of this talk about Cliff Fletcher potentially dumping salaries has got me wondering which salaries on the Leafs are actually dump-able? I don't think in the salary-cap era they could find a destination for Blake, Gill, Kubina, Tucker, Raycroft or McCabe. Not even for a 2010 seventh-rounder. I think Cliff will be in tough trying to free up cap space for next year.

Zachary Farrar, Toronto

A: I think any contract is dumpable. Just need a buyer. People go way overboard saying this player or that player is untradeable, but my thinking is, if you can trade Alexei Yashin, you can trade anybody. Don’t forget, other teams have needs and they also have contracts they don’t like. Everybody has something they’d like to move.

Q: Do you think that Ferguson's troubles began with Pat Quinn? He basically decided on Ferguson because he had veto rights over his replacement. He did not draft well. He traded the future for guys like Owen Nolan. He had a loosie goosie approach to coaching, basically throw a puck out there and let the veterans play. Ferguson saw the ship going down and reacted by trying to replace Belfour. He felt the pressure of the Leaf Nation and offered way too much money to McCabe, Kubina, Blake, & Tucker. Do you not think that he was a lame duck from the beginning?

Sean Murphy, Courtice

A: You can certainly make a case that Ferguson was a lame duck from the start. Certainly, taking a raw rookie, giving him the GM job and sticking him with a veteran head coach who used to be the GM and wanted somebody else to be his successor was not intelligent management planning. That said, Ferguson had time to put his own coach in place, and had time to orient the roster in a different way. We can all place the blame somewhere, but the bottom line is that the Leafs didn’t get better. They got worse.

Q: Damien,

How has everyone in the Toronto print media chosen to ingore Peddie's turn as the Wizard of Oz? Did none of the scribes notice that Peddie looked like he had lost the plot as he mouthed the words that Cliff Fletcher was speaking. Kirk, Peddie and the Wicked Witch of the East can march all of the usual suspects down the road paved with gold (Bay Street) and will find the President/GM job an impossible sell. Who would want to work for the organization where no one is really in charge per say? An organization where things have taken a Hitchcockian turn?

Here is the bottom line: The Teachers and their pension plan will continue to milk this cash cow dry until it is dry. Period. There is no cowboy riding in wearing a white hat, because no one who could turn this thing around is dumb enough to take the job. If the building is half full and the TV revenues start to crash then, and only then, will the Teacher's make a relevent move, perhaps sell even. I never thought I would say this, but I miss Harold, at least he was entertaining.

Michael Fritzlar, Toronto

A: Geez, you don’t find a pension plan entertaining? You have high standards. But seriously, I don’t think anyone has ignored Peddie’s goofy lip-synching at the Fletcher press conference. It’s been well documented everywhere.

The Teachers, meanwhile, are doing what they are supposed to do, which is maximize their investment. This story isn’t going to change. The only issue that might change is whether the pension plan, and the board, might afford an incoming executive more leeway and authority than was afforded JFJ.

Q: Teachers pension is all about money and profit. Jim Balsille is all about wanting a NHL team but owns a much larger company. Is there not a deal there to be made? The teachers have said they will not sell until they have something to invest their money. Balislle allows them to invest in a percentage of the RIM and takes ownership of the Leafs. Fire Peddie, and book the stanley cup parade. (I will be at the corner of Yonge and Front for the parade).

Brian M., Barrie

A: Balsillie looks like a panacea. But let’s face it, there’s no guarantees there, either. There is no magic pill here, folks. The only thing for sure is that I’m not smart enough to broker a deal between the pension plan and Balsillie.

Q: Hey Damien This one is real quick, in regards to general managers in the NHL, in general terms aside from making trades and signing players and coaches to outrageous contracts, what do they actually do on a full time basis? Scouting? Attend games and look distressed in their little boxes?

Grant Virgin, Fredericton

A: They have Blackberrys to keep warm and expense accounts to use. Seriously, most of these fellows are very hardworking, with large organizations to run. Many have responsibilities beyond the hockey team, or are part of larger corporate entities that require them to be in endless meetings. It used to be a nine-month a year job, but is now a year-round deal with good pay but lousy job security.

Q: I was looking at top NHL salaries for this year, by the way it is good to see McCabe earn his 4th highest defenceman salary every game, and I noticed that goalies are paid signifanctly less. Why is that? Whenever Hart or Conn Smythe nominations are made goalies are often involved. If they are deemed most valuable by trophy, why are they not paid as most valuable?

Mats Serviss, Belleville

A: This has been the case for a long time. In fact, goalies used to get paid a lot less in relation to their skating colleagues. I guess part of the answer may be that the number of goalies who have actually been dominant figures for 10 years or more is very small. They seem to have a period of three to four years in which they are very effective. So perhaps teams aren’t willing to make long-term, lucrative commitments to goaltenders they know will have to be replaced. But I agree it is weird, given that it’s the most important position in the sport.

Q: Hi Damien:

In all honesty, is there a softer team in the NHL than the Leafs? Every other team seems to employ their heavyweight on a more regular basis but more importantly they also carry 2nd and 3rd line guys with some grit and a willingness to get involved phsically if necessary (Ryan Malone, Scott Hartnetll, Matt Bradley, Brian Sutherby type player).

The Stajans, Steens, Tlustys of the world don't bring that jam. Am I wrong in thinking that opposing teams must lick their chops at the prospect of pushing the Leafs around?

Terry Williams, Elora

A: There’s no question that the Leafs aren’t a particularly feared or physical team. The players they have that were once seen as agitators – Tucker, Blake – just don’t play that way anymore. I don’t think the answer lies in enforcers. I think it lies in the types of grinders you mentioned. But this is a team that has for several months employed a first round pick (Tlusty) known to be a finesse player on its fourth line. The Leafs seem to seek out only offensive players and then spread them throughout the line. The concept of role players seems to escape them.

Q: Damien,

Am I off my rocker? I have heard a lot of complaints about Hal Gill lately. Sure he’s no superstar, but from what I can tell the Leafs play 5 defencemen that have a primary focus on offence, and offer no physical game, and only 1 defenceman (Gill) that has a primary focus on playing in his own zone, adding a little bit of a physical game and protecting the net. One of my biggest complaints about the Leafs defence is that (aside from Gill) none of them play defence. I would enjoy seeing a Bob Rouse type D on this team again and Gill is the closest we have to that. The only time Toskla has someone protecting the net is when Gill is on ice - I personally would like more Hal Gills on this team. Am I off my rocker?

Matt Hart, Toronto

A: I don’t know about wanting more Gills. But I agree this blueline is predominantly made up of puck-movers, not body-movers. Gill is what he is – a decent defender who is most usefully when assigned to check big-body offensive players. But even then, watch him lose Tkachuk driving to the net on Tuesday for one of the Blues goals. For $2 million in today’s NHL, however, that’s what you get.

Q: Hi Damien,

I picked Jason Blake in my hockey pool this year, so I have been following him rather closely. What I see is a guy that is probably the fastest skater on the team, getting more shots than anybody and quite a bit of ice time, especially on power plays and with top linemen.

Why doesn't he score more often?

Tony Bibbings, Bermuda

A: Well, he finally spelled out what everybody who watches this team already knew. He shoots too often from far out, eschewing opportunities to create chances for linemates. You’re just not going to score very often from 30 feet with a wrist shot in today’s NHL.

Q: Hey Damien,

Just out of curiosity, have the Leafs or anyone else ever considered using Chad Kilger on the point on the power play? The man has a world-record breaking shot, and certainly isn't as big of a defensive liability of others forwards who have taken on the job.

Nick K., Ottawa

A: Haven’t heard that one. I’m not even sure Chad would endorse the idea, giving that playmaking isn’t his best skill. He gets his shot off best moving down the wing, and even then doesn’t score that often. On the power play, it’s not just about having a big shot from the point. It’s about positioning yourself to get it off, and about working with teammates. But the Leaf powerplay has been terrible for a while now, and why they’ve gone back to positioning Kyle Wellwood with his back to the left post is absolutely beyond me.

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

Better Late Than Never?

Tardiness is the talk of the NHL today, but on two different fronts.

There's the late arrival, for starters, of Anaheim winger Teemu Selanne, who announced he was coming back to the Ducks on Monday. To be sure, Reijo Ruotsolainen used to show up a lot later in the NHL season than this, but many are suggesting Selanne's prolonged semi-retirement illustrates the need for the league to legislate on the matter by issuing a deadline by which players must commit to playing in the league.

Why? For starters, Selanne has earned the right to call his own shots, and if a team wants to go along, good for them. But its not like there's anything underhanded going on here, so rules for the sake of rules don't really make much of a difference.

And wouldn't you say the NHL is better with Selanne than without him? Of course, given the decisions of Selanne and Scott Niedermayer, the next prominent NHLer to announce his retirement is going to be created with a chorus of "Yeah, right."

In other lateness news, Ottawa goalie Ray Emery caused another mini-firestorm when he showed up four minutes late for practice on Monday.

Actually, given that players are supposed to be in the room 45 minutes before a scheduled workout, you could argue Emery was almost an hour late.

GM Bryan Murray told The Star this morning that he met with coach John Paddock last night and intends to chat with Emery today. Murray seemed intent on playing down the matter, but at the same time made it clear he's open to the possibility of moving Emery for another asset before the trade deadline or bringing in another goalie.

The Sens' payroll sits at $46 million, and given the prorated nature of salaries acquired this late in the year, they have lots of room to add athletes.

Any way you cut it, Emery is being portrayed as the bad boy of the NHL these days, what with Chris Simon still on enforced vacation. Being late a few times and scrapping with teammate Brian McGrattan seems to elevated Emery into the position of big-time troublemaker, which is probably a little unfair.

We'll see what the Sens decide to do later today, but the betting is once again Emery's indiscretion will be handled quietly and in-house.

Hype Fatigue

'Tis the season for hype, an assault on our sporting senses from a variety of fronts.

Perspective, my friends, is so very easy to lose at this time of year.

We are only halfway, for starters, through the annual two-week's worth of Super Bowl hype. This was an event born in hyperbole - the SUPER Bowl - and that personality has only grown with the game over the decades.

Last week, it was all about Tom Brady and his choice of supermodel girlfriends. This week, there will endless analysis, right down to the kickers, all building and building and building to the opening kickoff.

And, of course, Paula Abdul's halftime appearance. If only Simon Cowell was going to be there to say in his over-baked Brit accent, "That was awwww-ful."

The NHL gets into the hype thing too, of course, with its all-star weekend, but this year there was the added tomfoolery of a judged breakaway competition in which players were going to unveil their inner Picasso and show the world the marvellous magic of which they are capable when armed only with hockey stick and puck. Every bit of the weekend is delivering with breathlessness, as though its utterly incredible the league can find a way to get Tim Thomas and Mike Ribeiro both in Atlanta on the same weekend. Well, somehow they pulled it off.

The NBA all-star game is just around the corner, and not to be left out, the Pro Bowl will rear its glorious head a few weeks down the road.

It's all an exercise in meaningless hype.

The exception - and yes, as a tennis fan, this is surely a biased perspective - was the conclusion to the Australian Open on the weekend. Four colorful participants in the men's and women's final - Novak Djokovic, Jo-Wilfried Tsonga, Maria Sharapova and Ana Ivanovic - waged heavy battle in the first Grand Slam event of the tennis season.

Tennis isn't what it was in the 1970s, and yes, it lags behind the leisure activity known as golf when it comes to TV numbers.

But perhaps the death of tennis has been over-done. Over-hyped, maybe?

It has four major events every year - Down Under, French Open, Wimbledon, U.S. Open - that draw huge crowds in major world markets, attract lucrative sponsorships and drag in millions of TV viewers.

Each Grand Slam event has its unique personality, none as dowdy and bland as, say, the PGA Championship in golf. The problem for tennis, surely, is that the rest of its schedule, including the Toronto/Montreal events, are light years removed from the quality and dramatic effect of the Grand Slam events.

But when they do battle in the biggees, it's exciting, tense and, in the case of the men's five setters, absolutely rivetting in terms of athletes being pushed to the limit.

And that's no hype, folks.

Getting the Job Done

A couple of final thoughts on the departure of John Ferguson. . .

RICHARD LAUTENS/TORONTO STAR

It's an interesting contrast that while so many want to focus on only the good things that happened during Cliff Fletcher's first swing through Toronto from 1991-97 and are so willing to shield their eyes from all the bad things, JFJ could never, ever get any credit for anything positive he accomplished and the focus was always on his errors.

Give Ferguson the Fletcher treatment, and all you'd hear about is how cheap the Leafs got Tomas Kaberle for, or how wise it was to hang on to Nik Antropov, or how under his watch the Leafs have again become a team sporting significant numbers of drafted players.

The two mistakes that dogged JFJ were the huge contract he gave to Bryan McCabe and the decision to trade for Andrew Raycroft and try to force feed him to the Toronto market as a bona fide No. 1 goaltender.

But of the players he invested heavily in, none let him down more this season than Darcy Tucker.

By giving Tucker a four-year, $12 million no-trade deal last winter JFJ believed he was getting a truculent, heart-and-soul team leader and a consistent 20- to 25-goal man.

Instead, Tucker has become almost a total non-factor, has six goals in 43 games and seems most intent on making sure people blame all these injuries he's supposed to have rather than him.

If Tucker plays like what Ferguson believed he was buying, you could argue the Leaf season never gets quite so desperate and JFJ still has his job.

Now, with Alexei Ponikarovsky and Alex Steen both out, Leaf fans better get ready for increased doses of Tucker. Against Washington on Thursday night, he skated 17 minutes and 54 seconds, about double what he was starting to receive on a regular basis.

For that, Tucker delivered no points, two shots on goal and another minus. On Washington's winning goal, Tucker was easily banged off the puck by Alex Ovechkin, then seemed frozen as Ovechkin hustled back into a dangerous position to begin the sequence that led to the goal.

Other than the big clatter he causes when he misses yet another hit and hits the glass, you'd have little reason to notice Tucker on most nights. He's now been infected by Tie Domi syndrome, a player who consistently vocalizes his value and his determination and his team-first attitude, but rarely actually shows any of it on the ice.

It's reasonable to suggest the majority of Leaf fans were happy to see Ferguson go and happy to see Fletcher return.

Now we'll see if any of the players truly responsible for the state of this 14th place team - like Tucker - turn their seasons around.

Mail Bag - Early Edition

Day One of the Cliff Fletcher Era, Part Two, is officially underway.

Actually, it probably began last night when Doug Gilmour and Jeff Jackson, two key members of the departed John Ferguson’s hockey cabinet, jetted back from the top prospects get-together in Edmonton to begin the process of bringing Fletcher up to speed on what the Leaf management team has been working on for weeks.

It'll be Fletcher's job to sift through the information, start getting a read on the team starting with tonight’s home game against Washington and then preparing his own game plan for the Feb. 26 trade deadline.

What will be intriguing is whether Fletcher relies on Ferguson's group of advisors, or maybe even tries to bring in a person or two to help him through this period. During his last stint with the Leafs, assistant GM Bill Watters was his point man on many deals, and interestingly, Watters is now a radio man in Toronto charged with dissecting the Leafs' every move.

Will Watters be as tough on Fletcher as he was on JFJ? That will be fascinating to listen to.

Gilmour, meanwhile, is a intriguing variable here. He was very much part of the Ferguson team, trying to find whether his future might lie in hockey management or coaching, and the ties between he and Fletcher are obvious. Fletcher brought him to Calgary, brought him to Toronto and traded him to New Jersey. Might Fletcher lean on his former captain now in this time of stress?

Anyways, yesterday was a crazy day with lots of questions and comments from Star readers, so we decided to go with our weekly Thursday mail bag a day ahead of time.

This, obviously, is a hot story that’s going to stay hot for a while.

Now on to this week’s mail bag:

Q: How much do you think of the Coyotes' current success should be attributed to Fletcher?

On one hand, commentators are saying good things about the young Coyotes and their prospects, most of whom were acquired while Fletcher was part of the management group (though not the GM). On the other hand, Fletcher was canned by the Coyotes in their most-recent management housecleaning.

Also, how much of Fletcher's downfall in his first Leaf engagement should be attributed to (Steve) Stavro interference? It was my understanding that the first reacquisition of Wendel (Clark) - in my mind the beginning of the end - in which he gave up Kenny Jonsson, a no. 1 draft pick (Luongo) and change, was really orchestrated by Stavro.

John Hunt, Harvard, Massachusetts

A: Re the Coyotes, Fletcher was there when many of the young players were brought into the organization, and so he deserves some of the credit, as does ex-GM Mike Barnett. Many in the hockey world think Phoenix talent sleuth Tom Kurvers, a former Leaf, is one of the bright young minds in the game, and he’s getting kudos as well. The problem in Phoenix was that the management team seemingly couldn’t decide on a strategy and wasted a lot of time bringing in expensive vets who couldn’t produce. Barnett has made it clear Fletcher was a key component of the 'Yotes front office, so evaluate that as you will. As with every situation, he deserves both the credit and the blame, or at least some of it.

It’s hard to evaluate the Stavro influence during Fletcher’s first run. We do know Stavro was against hiring Fletcher in ’91 and tried to block it, but then fell in line and supported the president/GM. But when Stavro ran into money issues in the mid-1990s, he was less inclined to let the Leaf payroll soar, and there were pressures on Fletcher to cut costs. Fletcher had to balance those pressures with his hockey instincts, as many managers in other cities had to do as well, and the results were a team that slid downhill and foolishly sacrificed top draft picks.

Q: Hey Damien, I think most Maple Leaf fans (a few exceptions) love what Mats has done over the years for the team. It's been said that he doesn't want to look like he's 'abandoning the sinking ship' by leaving. Do you think his popularity here would take a hit if he declined to waive his no-trade clause? I know, despite being a big fan of his, I'll be very unhappy if, your friend, Mr. Fletcher can't deal Sundin for some picks and prospects. Thanks.

J. Wideman, Uxbridge

A: I’ve always been surprised, really, that Sundin isn’t far more popular in Toronto. Instead, far less talented types like Tie Domi and Darcy Tucker have been greater fan favourites, which I find inexplicable. That said, I do think Sundin would be viewed with limited negativity if he refuses to go to another team. Some will applaud his loyalty and treasure his obvious playing ability but a majority, I think, recognize the motherlode of talent and possbility he could bring to the team in a trade. Morever, it's important to understand that if he isn't traded, he may end up walking away at the end of the season and the Leafs would get nothing for their most important asset.

Q: With the firing of JFJ - now Fletcher is temporarily in place to make moves and run next years Leafs draft. Can it now be said, with the hiring of Gord Kirke (not a Hockey guy) to work with Peddie to find a new GM within 19 months that the Leafs now officially have "Dumb and Dumber" running their management team?

As soon as Fletcher wants to make a move - Peddie will question it because the next GM may not want such a move - it will always leave such a question. Peddie will still have the last say - he is the problem.

All Fletcher's hiring is, is an attempt by Peddie to get the media and people to stop harping that there is no hockey knowledge running the team - it really bothers Peddie. Peddie wants a puppet - JFJ was his main puppet - now Peddie has Fletcher as his puppet - he will hold the trump card about a future permanent GM to limit any hockey moves Fletcher wishes to do even in the short term.

Anthony Frost, Toronto

A: Not sure what the question is here, although I would disagree with your characterization that Kirke is a "dumb" guy. Nothing could be further from the truth, and the fact he has no ties or allegiances to the MLSE board might allow him to produce something out of the box.

With regards to your thoughts on Peddie’s motivatons for hiring Fletcher, I agree that the entire plan is largely an attempt to improve the image of MLSE at a time when the hockey team is slipping. This isn’t about building a champion; it’s about selling a product.

Q: Do the MLSE directors actually believe that firing Ferguson actually changes anything? The bigger problem is that morons like Peddie still effectively run the team. Is it plausible that upper management will finally stop pretending they know how to run a hockey team, and hand the team over to someone who does (and stop micromanaging) - like the Raptors did with Colangelo?

Erich Isopp, Vancouver

A: Boy, those anti-Peddie sentiments just keep rolling in. I think the MLSE board had an image problem they wanted to try and fix. These folks really just wanna keep the money rolling in and get people off their back. It's the "winning if necessary, but not necessarily winning" approach to the sport.

Q: Hi Damien, you've well documented your thoughts on the hiring of Cliff Fletcher. The only thing I would say is let's wait and see. The only way this move could be deemed successful is if Cliff is able to make trades to free up cap space and rid the team of some of the ludicrous contracts that were given out. Which is easier said than done as other teams surely realize that the contracts are ludicrous. But if Cliff could clean up the roster so the next president/GM can come in with a much cleaner table, than I would consider this move a success.

Scott O., Toronto

A: I agree. True, I don’t believe bringing back Fletcher is a strong move. But if he does what is necessary and makes a series of transactions that, in effect, clear the decks for the next guy, you will certainly hear words of praise from yours truly. I’m not saying Fletcher is incapable of doing what needs to be done; I just doubt he’ll do it. But perhaps he’ll prove me dead wrong.

Q: Damien,

Enjoy the column, keep up the good work. On Detroit sports radio Scotty Bowman is a frequent guest enlighting the audience with his savvy and unfiltered view of the current state of the NHL. He's a God here with arguably the best resume in the business when it comes to building championship teams.

Please tell me why the Leafs time and time again refuse his offer to help? Is there something i'm missing?

Christian Gani, Detroit

A: Well, I think Bowman wanted big money and full control. The Leaf ownership group wouldn’t be crazy about it either. In particular, they don’t like being told to keep their noses out of the hockey operation.

Q: Hi Damien,

My question is, why does the media take it so easy on the Leafs management when given a chance to directly question them? All we've been hearing for the past few months is what a bad job Richard Peddie has done as president and how bad the Ontario Teacher's Pension board is at running the Leafs as a winning team. Yet at the press conference when Ferguson was fired, no one pointed out the many many mistakes that Peddie and the board has made over the years. Also no one questioned Fletcher about his "draft schmaft" comment. Why does the same media that rightfully bashes these guys everywhere suddenly back down when presented with a direct chance to show them up? Are they afraid that they will be blacklisted from future press conferences? Don't want to lose any of their sources?

I only ask because I would have loved for someone to have stood up during the Ferguson/Fletcher press conference and asked Peddie and Tanenbaum directly about all their failures in running the team.

Vsem Yenovkian, Toronto

A: Interesting question. I would disagree to some extent in that Peddie, in particular, was peppered with questions during the press conference. What you didn’t see on television was that Tanenbaum was scrummed afterwards and grilled fairly aggressively on the team’s failures. Fletcher was also scrummed and asked about his "draft shmaft" comments. So I guess the answer is that what you see on television isn’t necessarily all that happens. In particular, those of us in the print business aren’t really that inclined to do TV’s work by providing probing questions when instead we can do it for the benefit of our newspapers off-camera later.

Q: Hi Damien,

I'm not really convinced that the Leafs are as bad as people have said in the last couple of weeks. Toskala was out for the vast majority of the recent loosing skid, and was still recovering when he played in Anaheim a few games back. If you look at the games where Toskala was in net since he became the undisputed #1 in late November, the Leafs are something like 9-4-3, which is pretty damn good. Isn't it possible that they'll be just fine if Toskala stays healthy? And if Blake, Tucker and Wellwood can all raise their games to where they should be...who knows?

Jeremy Huws, Ottawa

A: There’s always a best case scenario, sure. But the fact is Toskala didn’t stay healthy, and that Blake, Tucker and Wellwood have been massive failures. If Toskala can play every game and the three forwards suddenly turn into all-stars, sure the team would be better. But that’s not the reality, is it?

Q: Damien,

I do wonder if the T.O. media is at least somewhat duplicitous when it comes to MLSE's failure to take serious steps towards rebuilding? As soon as the team strings a couple of wins together, right away I see articles talking about a 'winning streak', and how the team is still only five points out of a playoff spot. Of course the dynamic duo on HNIC are the worst offenders, with RM and DC assuring everyone each Saturday night that 'the Leafs are gonna be okay ... they're turning things around.'

People talk about how tough the media is here on the Leafs, but to me it seems like they're always cutting the team slack. I'm guessing the tone of Montreal's media would be somewhat different under similar circumstances? Your thoughts?

Ron Rogers, Toronto

A: I agree. I hear people say the Toronto media is part of the problem, but I really think we – TV, radio and print – are, as you say, a rather forgiving lot. Moreover, if people want to blame the media for being an influential part of the Leaf failures, well, they better carve our names on the Cup if the drought ever ends.

Q: If you were running the Leafs, is there any complete NHL Roster you would not trade the complete Leafs roster for? I look at other teams in the NHL and when I look at them from a collective standpoint, I would rather have the roster of any of the other 29 teams (even Florida) than the current collection of blue and white. Your thoughts?

Brent Achtymichuk, Toronto

A: I don’t particularly like Tampa’s roster, with all the money concentrated in the hands of three players and without quality goaltending. The Islanders’ roster doesn’t exactly knock me dead, either, but that team seems to get more out of less all the time. But I never bought the line that this Leaf team was particularly talented; particularly overrated, I would say.

Q: Hey Damien, What's wrong with bringing in Cliff Fletcher as a caretaker until the summer? He could handle the Sundin trade and clear the payroll for the GM. Ferguson can't be trusted to handle that now. The Raptors did the same thing by having Wayne Embry conduct the Jalen Rose trade before Bryan Colangelo was brought in.

Raymond Young, Toronto

A: Well, if you believe Fletcher is capable of handling the Sundin deal and clearing the payroll and doing sweet deals for the Leafs, then there is nothing wrong with it. I don’t think he can do it effectively and without making a lot of excuses as to why he couldn’t do this or that. We’ll see.

Q: Hi Damien,

I was wondering about the Leafs plans for Cliff Fletcher. I keep hearing that he would be brought in as an interim GM, but I also understand that the Leafs are going to have to compensate him well enough to make it worth his while to give up his 2 year severence package with the Coyotes. I'm worried that if they have to pay him for 2 years, they're going to want him to work for two years (not a Fletcher fan myself). Any insight as to just how long this interim regime may last? Will we use our first high draft pick in years with Mr. "draft-schmaft" steering the ship?

Bradley Meldrew, Toronto

A: Mr. Draft-Shmaft will indeed be making that pick, and Leaf fans can only hope he’ll do better than he did with Brandon Convery. His contract is for 19 months, with no set deadline on when he’ll magically turn from interim GM to paid consultant. The best guess is that will happen by July.

Q: Damien, I hear all these old time names being thrown around - Cliff Fletcher, Scotty Bowman, etc. for the top Leaf job. Now, putting aside the question of whether the Leafs board will ever give their GM the power he will need without their interference, why are these the names that we keep hearing?

Fletcher, as you rightly pointed out, is a step backwards. Scotty Bowman, while an astounding coach never really showed much as a GM.

My main question is why is Bob Nicholson not #1 and #1A on every list? The guy will know more about up and coming talent than any other person alive, has the respect of anyone who ever played and has the brass to get things done. Sometimes I get the impression that names are floated out there by the media because it is who THAY think should get the job. Well, I'm floating Nicholson.

Ken Morlis, Toronto

A: A good float. He was in the mix back in ’03, you’ll recall, when Ferguson was hired. Many teams have had the opportunity to hire Nicholson, but none have as of yet. He is a well-respected hockey man, but he has no experience at the NHL level or with managing or coaching a team. Really, he’s an unknown commodity, albeit one that might well have the goods to be a very good GM.

Q: Damien,

All this talk about Cliff Fletcher, but no one mentions John Muckler. He coached the Gretzky-less Oilers to a Cup. He rebuilt the Sabres into a Stanley Cup condender (Only to be ripped-off by a Brett Hull kick-in). He retooled Ottawa into a Cup contender. They haven't made any changes since he left and they are still Cup contenders.

Hire Mr. Muckler as president and interm GM, let him clean house. And just before the draft hire Ken Holland as GM/VP and Doug Gilmour as his assistant (if Mr. Holland would agree, it would be his call). In two to three years. Mr. Muckler could then semi-retire, with Mr. Holland stepping into President role and hopefully Dougie would ge ready to step into the GM role.

I'm just puzzled if they were serious about rebuilding I agree with you and think Cliff Fletcher is not the right man.

Dave Callaghan, Toronto

A: I think the scenario you’ve outlined would be far preferable to that which the Leafs have put in place.

Q: Hi Damien, I am wondering. Writing a column in the city of Toronto with so much subject matter to choose from, i.e. the Leafs, if you might find it boring, or more difficult if you lived in a city with a more stable hockey team. Like Detroit for example.

I've had jobs I loved, I was so busy putting out fires that I didn't have time to think about just how lousy it was, and others where the work was so easy it actually was boring. Just wondering.

Bruce Allan, Brockville, Ont.

A: Well, I think that it's never boring covering hockey. My enjoyment of my job doesn’t depend on whether the Leafs win or lose, but whether there are interesting stories to write about that people are passionate about. I’m sure there are other great towns to write hockey in, but I can’t imagine there's a better one than Toronto.

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

Slow and Easy or Fast and Furious?

With Cliff Fletcher poised to take over the Maple Leafs - the official team announcement came just before noon today that John Ferguson Jr. has been fired - the interesting question is this; how will Fletcher try to fix this team?

To answer that, it's worthwhile to look at his first moves when he was hired the last time to run the Leafs, back in July, 1991.

The Leafs were coming off a 57-point season and had missed the playoffs five of 10 years, meaning they were probably in worse shape then compared to now.

Fletcher, then 55, came in with a five-year, $4 million contract, albeit one that wasn't set in stone until the following September when Steve Stavro gave up his battle to have Fletcher either fired or reined in.

"There's not going to be any quick cures," vowed Fletcher.

So what was his first big move? Did he stockpile draft picks and prospects?

Uh, not quite.

Instead, in September he swung a deal with Edmonton to bring in three veterans - goalie Grant Fuhr, winger Glenn Anderson and forward Craig Berube - in a whopper of a deal. Fuhr was coming off a shortened year due to a drug suspension, but Fletcher proclaimed him to be the "cornerstone to a new foundation."

In exchange, the Leafs surrendered a package of young players including 23-year-old Vince Damphousse, Luke Richardson (22), Scott Thornton (20) and goalie Peter Ing (22).

Damphousse retired in 2004 with a Stanley Cup ring from Montreal and 432 NHL goals, 314 for teams other than the Leafs.

Richardson has played 1,385 NHL games and is still skating for Ottawa. Thornton is also still playing and gunning for 1,000 games-played.

And what about the three players the Leafs received?

Berube was moved four months later in the monstrously successful Doug Gilmour deal with Calgary. Fuhr was peddled 18 months later in another deal that brought short-term help to the Leafs in sniper Dave Andreychuk. Anderson lasted all the way until March, 1994 before being traded to New York.

As of today, Fletcher now runs the Leafs again. But will he take the same approach?

Stay tuned.

Sibling Superiority

As Canadians and lovers of hockey, we have our Sutters and Staals, extraordinary stories of prolific sporting families. Once upon a time, Bobby and Dennis Hull were among the stars of the NHL, as were Phil and Tony Esposito.

But when it comes to sheer accomplishment, its pretty hard to top the Manning clan of New Orleans and the Williams family of Compton, California.

On Sunday, Eli Manning steered the New York Football Giants to victory over the Green Bay Packers on what truly was the frozen tundra of Lambeau Field. His brother, Peyton, guided the Indianapolis Colts to last year's Super Bowl, meaning Archie Manning's boys have quarterbacked back-to-back Super Bowl entrants.

In a world where every parent thinks their kid is going to the big time, that's pretty amazing for two brothers, both of whom have had plenty of doubters along the way.

But even that story, really, takes second place to the tale of Venus and Serena Williams, both of whom were still alive in the Australian Open as of today.

The Manning boys had their dad to teach them how to be NFL quarterbacks. The Williams girls just had their father, Richard, and his crazy dream that two ghetto girls could be tennis champions.

Yet both did it, and both are multiple Grand Slam champions, and they may be headed for another of their improbable sister vs. sister matchups in the Aussie Open finals.

(Ed. Note: That possibility ended when Serena was upset in straight sets by Serbia's Jelena Jankovic in the quarterfinals on Monday night Down Under).

Venus is surely the best grass court player of her generation, and there's an argument to be made that the oft-injured Serena could be the best ever to play the game.

The Mannings have pulled off an amazing double. But love 'em or hate 'em, the Williams sisters remain the most incredible family story in North American sports history.

Well, Ummm, Maybe Not

Two wins and already you can feel the impetus for change fading.

This is, after all, the Maple Leafs. They don't want to win, not really, but at the same time, they'd rather not have the entire city hating them.

Something in between, the mushy middle, is what has made MLSE what it is today.

So if this thing gets to a comfy .500 level over the next two weeks, not impossible, then you can expect more nothing.

No second coming of Cliff Fletcher. More JFJ at the helm with the executioner's axe pulled back to, oh, about an inch from his neck.

Which means opportunity may once more be ignored. Which means the opportunity to draft high this summer may go out the window if the club can manage to finish, oh, 10th or 11th, certainly possible if the decision is made not to have a fire sale before the trade deadline.

Hey, knowing this hockey organization, it might TRADE AWAY its first round pick to another team in order to pick up some veteran and take a last minute run at eighth in the east.

Leaf fans, I think, are coming to understand this. They know the best chance for change and real improvement lies in this season going right down the tubes.

If that doesn't happen, well, the mandarins of MLSE can say, "Well, ummm, maybe we don't have to change a thing. And the fans sure are cheering loud again, aren't they?"

The dynamic is the same, and every win this team picks up over the next few months takes it further away from ever ending its Stanley Cup drought.

Thursday Mail Bag

Ah, the fun never stops, does it?

The Maple Leafs, it would appear, have now turned their search for executive aid to the beaches of Cancun where Cliff Fletcher has to be enjoying the sun and wondering, “Man, how stupid are these guys?”

Ten years ago the Leafs didn’t want him around. Now he’s the smartest guy in their Rolodex. Funniest inclusion in the alleged pursuit of Fletcher in that he would also bring along David Poile as the new Leafs GM.

Just wondering, but isn’t this the same Poile who turned down the Leaf GM job after Fletcher left, largely because he wanted nothing to do with the crazy Toronto hockey market?

Thought so. Meanwhile, Scotty Bowman must look at all his Stanley Cup rings and wonder what it is about the jewelry that turns Richard Peddie off so much. Now on to this week’s mail bag:

Q: I had the unfortunate experience of being at the Anaheim-Toronto game on the 9th. I don't get very many chances of seeing my team live these days, so it was a complete disappointment to see how listless they were against the Stanley Cup champs. No heart. No soul. I sat next to Joe Bowen's family and even his son had his head buried in his little hands. These are hopeless times in Leafs Nation.

Kam Mohager, Beverly Hills

A: Look on the bright side. The Leafs still own their first round draft pick. Of course, if someone now offers them the 2008 equivalent of Tom Kurvers. . .

Q: Damien:

With the Leafs in a downward spiral and MLSE's refusal to do anything about it, Where are all the loyal Leaf fans in Toronto? Why hasn't anyone picketed the MLSE office yet? It has been done to other sport franchises, why hasn't anyone organized any for the Leafs yet? I might just have to fly up from Honduras and do it myself the Leafs stink so bad.

Aaron Etches, West End, Roatan Honduras

A: See, the problem with picketing is that there would be a lot of congestion with the scalpers doing heavy business outside the ACC. In other words, while some picketed, others wouldn’t be able to wait to overpay for Leaf tickets. Moreover, the real decision-makers, the board of MLSE, wouldn’t be found anywhere near the building. They're in other office towers around the city, snickering to themselves about what suckers Toronto hockey fans are.

Q: Hi Damien,

What's happened to Darcy Tucker? I'm embarrassed to wear his jersey around Calgary despite him being a born and bred Albertan. His point production has fallen off so dramatically to the point that Hal Gill has twice as many points as him. Is it because he signed a hefty 5-year deal with the team? Do you think players start taking it easy mentally and physically after they sign a long-term deal? It seems the same goes for Jason Blake & Bryan McCabe.

John Mullrooney, Calgary

A: Boy, Paul Maurice would sure like an answer to this question. I think Tucker got away from what made him successful and decided he was a goal-scorer, not a scrappy, dogged, snarling winger willing to pay a heavy physical price. That was undoubtedly influenced by the injuries he’s incurred in recent years which have made it more difficult for him to bang and crash every night. He went from being crazed Sideshow Bob to Mr. Finesse, with no stops in between. And yes, I do think the contract had something to do with it. Different dollars often make players believe they have to be something different.

Q: Damien:

Enjoy your column and brutal assessment of the Leafs. I'm a Torontonian who winters in Arizona and still watches the torture called Leafs games on satellite. I was wondering if JFJ has had trouble luring good free agents or players with no trade clauses to Toronto.

You hear the comments about how Leaf players find it difficult to play in "this market" and wonder if they don't complain to the other players about it. (Personally it sickens me to hear these highly paid winers complain about playing a game for a living where they can be set for life after a 5 year career).

I'm not a JFJ supporter, but it may be harder than we realize to rebuild this team because of the poor reputation that our ownership group has amongst the players and potential GM's out there. What do you hear?

Arnie Porter, Phoenix

A: At this moment, I would doubt Toronto would be a destination of choice for a lot of NHLers, but that has to do more with the fact, I would think, that it’s a lousy hockey team with no chance of taking a run at a Cup for five years. Given the players, however, that have signed as free agents in Toronto over the past decade, I don’t really think there’s much evidence to support the notion that players are disinclined in general to play in Toronto. From Curtis Joseph to Ed Belfour to Gary Roberts to Shayne Corson to Alexander Mogilny to Pavel Kubina to Hal Gill to Jason Blake, plus others than haven’t been mentioned, the Leafs have generally been able to compete in the free agent market.

Q: Hi Damien, love reading your blog.

Given JFJ's difficult position on the hot seat with MLSE (they made him a lame duck with no contract extension and the "8th seed or bust" mentality provoked some terrible off-season moves), is there anything that he could do to salvage the season? Conversely, is there any way he could convince MLSE that it is time to rebuild the broken Leafs?

Jim S., Toronto

A: I think he could convince the board its time to rebuild the Leafs. I just think he’d have a hard time convincing the board he’s the one to do it. The curious problem for Ferguson now is that winning more games, which usually makes people happy, is likely to be counter-productive for the team in that it will take them further away from a top draft pick this June. And Ferguson knows that. Losing and losing big is the beginning of the answer for the Leafs, but that sure won’t help JFJ.

Q: If the Leafs do the smart thing and trade for some draft picks for Sundin, I would like to see them try to attach Raycroft to the deal. I was remembering how the Red Sox had to take Lowell in order to get Beckett which hasn’t worked out to be the albatross people were expecting.

Raycroft is a better back-up than Clemmensen but since this season is done and once they promote Pogge they are going to have to get rid of a goaltender anyway why not get rid of him now.

I’m sure there is some flaw in my thinking. What is it?

Rory Macdonald, British Virgin Islands

A: No flaw. And not a bad idea. That’s how teams get rid of bad contracts. That said, if you attach Raycroft to a Sundin deal, that reduces what you’ll receive in terms of prospects and picks in return. Maybe its better to keep Raycroft, who at $2 million isn’t a cap killer, and take more in return for Sundin.

Q: With all of the talk of the possibility/probability of Sundin being traded, I was wondering who you thought would be the likely candidate for the captaincy of the Leafs? Of course that's assuming that the incoming player(s)involved in the trade aren't ready (worthy) to wear the C.

Pat Eales, Oakville

A: Great question, Pat. I don’t really see a player on the roster capable of carrying the “C.” That said, I would also say that Matt Stajan has been a stand-up guy throughout this entire swoon and seems to be a player, while limited, who can stand the heat in Toronto. Perhaps one day he might grow into captain material.

Q: Damien,

What the hell is wrong with Bob Clarke? I guess since people overlooked the fact that he was a dirty player when he played he feels compelled to do the same for others? I find it absolutely ludicrous that he can publicly defend cheap shots and dirty hits with a straight face without someone holding him to account for it!

Ryan Mitchell, London

A: I think Clarke loves to stir the pot, and loves to see people become outraged when he does so. I wouldn’t take everything he says so seriously.

Every Thursday, Damien Cox answers your questions in The Spin, only at thestar.com.

Click here to submit a question.

One Step Forward, Four Back

There are many reasons why the Leafs can't move forward.

One is that this franchise can never resist moving backwards.

They fired Punch Imlach in 1969 because he was running the team into the ground. Then they brought him back a decade later to finish the job.

Carl Brewer walked out on the team in 1965. They brought him back 15 years later at age 41 and he aptly demonstrated he couldn't play anymore.

Wendel Clark was the future when he was drafted in 1985, and no longer the future when he was traded away for Mats Sundin in 1994. Then they brought him back. Twice.

Doug Gilmour brought the last sense of glory to the team with the run to the conference finals in '93 and '94, but by the winter of 1997 was gone for a package of futures - Jason Smith, Alyn McCauley and Steve Sullivan.

Five years later, he was back again, if only for an unbelievably brief time. Then he came back again as an executive.

I could go on. Mike Pelyk, Steve Thomas, Drake Berehowsky, Tie Domi, Bobby Baun, Darby Hendrickson - the list just goes on and on. I mean, last week, they extended an offer to Curtis Joseph to come back for another shot.

It fits a franchise bereft of ideas that the best ones always seem to be familiar ones, usually ones that failed before.

No other team does this, or at least not nearly to this extent.

So of course the Leafs have reached out to Cliff Fletcher.

It's the only hockey executive's name most of these dummies would know.

Come on back, Cliff. All is forgiven. At a time when rebuilding through the draft is the only way to go, why not re-hire the man who coined the phrase, "Draft, schmaft?"

Does nobody remember that in Fletcher's last season the Leafs finished with 68 points and were even worse than they are now? Doesn't anybody remember they didn't even get to use that miserable season to draft high because the No. 4 pick was traded to the New York Islanders, who selected Roberto Luongo?

Going for it now and paying for it later was the m.o. of the last 15 years of Fletcher's career. He traded Brett Hull to get Rob Ramage and Rick Wamsley. And in Phoenix, he was part of the management team that embarked on a disastrous program to bring in faded stars in an attempt to make the Coyotes competitive.

Now, let's be clear. Fletcher is a classy, classy individual who has done more in and for the game that most anybody on the planet. When he was inducted into the Hall of Fame as a builder, he was one of the few you could say actually deserved it.

But hiring him to be the caretaker GM isn't just a case of MLSE being unable to think outside the box. It's that their box is so incredibly small.

It's a desperate attempt to grab on to Fletcher's popularity, still impressive in the city a decade after he left.

Fletcher has oodles of friends in hockey, and so you'll hear tribute after tribute about him, about his knowledge and experience.

What you won't hear is anybody telling you the truth because people respect Fletcher so much.

They won't tell you that they had to get him out of out the Phoenix hockey operation super fast because he was driving Mike Barnett and Wayne Gretzky crazy.

Fletcher was allowed to walk away from that hockey disaster without a mark on him because he is so beloved in the game.

But if he comes back, the gloves will be off again.

I hope Fletcher tells these morons to take a hike. He doesn't deserve this, although you can bet the old energy is coursing through the Silver Fox's bloodstream this morning.

Being a GM in the NHL these days is a young man's game. It takes an incredible amount of dedication and energy and drive. Wanna hire a Fletcher? Then hire his very smart son, Chuck, now an executive in Pittsburgh. This team needs a GM to get to work now, not an interim GM to hand off the job in June or July, thus putting the Leafs behind the eight-ball for next season. Again.

Then again, we all need a good laugh now and then. And watching the Leafs go backwards again is just too funny. Remember when they fired Roger Neilson, then brought him back a couple of days later and wanted him to wear a paper bag over his head.

Hey, Maybe Cliff will wear a paper bag!

But if he won't do it, how about Floyd Smith? Or Pat Burns, yes, that'll work. Or Doug Carpenter, or Gerry McNamara, or John Brophy, or Jim Gregory, or Mike Smith, or. . . . .