The Spin will return Labour Day

The Spin will return Labour Day.

Tennis Soothsaying

Turns out Novak Djokovic had a crystal ball after all.

The Serbian tennis star, ranked No. 3 in the world, raised many an eyebrow before Wimbledon in June when he suggested Roger Federer was no longer scaring the bejeezus out of every other player on tour. Federer's humiliation in the final of the French Open to Rafael Nadal, Djokovic suggested, had left the Swiss star vulnerable.

"Some things are changing. I think he's a little bit shaken with that loss and mentally he has been struggling in the last couple of months," Djokovic said. "It's normal to have ups and downs after four years of absolute dominance on the men's tour.

"New names are coming, fresh talented players who believe more they can win against him and I am one of them. . .Suddenly he is worried a little bit."

Some wondered how Djokovic, with only one Grand Slam on his resume, could dare suggest such things about Federer, who has 12. Moreover, it gave new credence to the notion that while Federer and Nadal are quite chummy, neither feels as warmly towards Djokovic.

Well, Djokovic has, over the past few weeks, turned out to be a soothsayer.

Federer was stunned to lose on grass to Nadal at Wimbledon, his confidence shaken despite the epic nature of their five-set classic. Losing to nobody Gilles Simon of France Wednesday night at the Rexall Centre, meanwhile, was a new form of embarrassment for the player who, for four incredible years, dominated the circut with 11 Grand Slam victories in 16 events.

Clearly, there's an edge that's not quite there any longer for Federer. He dismissed the notion earlier this week that most tennis champions peak at 25 - he's about to turn 27 - but now faces the possiblity of not being the No. 1 ranked singles entry at the Beijing Olympics.

He has lost 10 matches this year after losing eight all of last year, and is winless in the first three Grand Slams of the season. If Nadal wins the Rogers Cup this week, he would have the opportunity to take over the world's No. 1 ranking next week in Cincinnati after Federer has held the title for 234 consecutive weeks.

Something's missing from Federer's game - wealth and celebrity can do that to a fellow - and now that he's back to playing without a coach after parting with Tony Roche last year, its up to him to figure it out. He's two Grand Slam victories shy of Sampras' all-time record, a mark once thought easily achievable that now looks to be more of a challenge.

A Different Approach

Being at the ACC on Monday night made me contemplate the decisions to honor both Wendel Clark and Doug Gilmour next season by raising their numbers, Nos. 17 and 93, respectively, to the rafters.

And I'll get to that. Just wait a minute.

But I was at the ACC to see the first of three Eagles shows in the city this week, so let me play rock reviewer for just a day. Actually, cancel that. This morning was a chance to feel a lot like people who go to a Leaf game, enjoy every minute of it, and then open up their Star the next morning to discover to their dismay is was mediocre game and the Leafs have all kinds of problems.

That, I have to admit, was my personal reaction this morning when I read Greg Quill's expert evaluations of last night's concert. Quill's one of the best in the business, one of the few you never have to worry is giving you anything less than the straight goods as he sees, or hears, them.

He liked parts of the concert, other parts not so much. Of course, it's not his job to cheer for the Eagles to do well, or to enjoy the idiosyncratic expressions of the changes in the vintage band over the years, or to hope for the best for a band that has been around for an awfully long time and produced an lot of terrific music.

That's the job of the fan, and I was at the ACC as a fan, pure and simple. I wanted the Eagles to be great. Moreover, having done some extensive reading on the group and its various changes over the decades, it was a change to see the whole story, from the Desperado days right up to the new album, Long Road Out of Eden.

I liked them most in the early 1970s, less so as the years went by, intermittently enjoying a song here or there but never an entire album. But they were a product of a particular place and time, and they have certainly been a very human group, torn apart by drugs and jealousy and paranoia, and then put back together. It was interesting to see a band that became all about Don Henley and Glenn Frey emerge on Monday night with that pair more willing to share the spotlight with both Timothy B. Schmit and Joe Walsh, not to mention the various other musicians supporting the core group. In fact, Walsh was the star of the second half of the show, which wasn't exactly to my liking but certainly was to a large portion of the audience.

In fact, to those going to see the second and third shows this week, understand that, yes, you're seeing the Eagles, but you'll also be hearing big chunks of the solo work of Henley, Frey and Walsh. To understand this band - there's a great book written in 1998 by an author named Marc Eliot - you have to understand that from the start, when they began as a country rock band with founding members Bernie Leadon and Randy Meisner, there was a constant push over the years to become more of a rock band, to gain that rock edge. On Monday, in the second half, they were that rock band, for better or worse. So for an Eagles fan, the entire concert was representative of the entire Eagles story, warts and all, good music and bad. Personally, I can't stand Henley's Dirty Laundry and can only take so much of Walsh, and the social commentary from a band that has made zillions of dollars starts to wear a bit, but that's part of the Eagles story. To hear Frey sing Take it to the Limit was intriguing, for that was Meisner's song, and the song can never sound the same without his ability to hit the distinctive high notes before he was rinsed from the operation. Hotel California, introduced by a long horn solo, was mesmerizing, although any Eagles fan worth his or her salt knows that Don Felder authored the crucial riff, and later sued the rest of his former partners, wrote an unflattering book and remains persona non grata. The show was long - it ended about 11:45 - and in Frey, in particular, you saw a band giving it all, not bad for a bunch of geezers.

So like a Leafs fan who takes in a game, loves it despite its shortcomings, and wants to see it written that way the next day, I guess I felt momentarily disheartened to read Quill's take. But in this case, he's the columnist, I'm the fan. That's how it's supposed to work. But maybe I'll understand a little better the next time an outraged reader drops an email bomb on me when he doesn't like my take on a big game.

Now on to Clark and Gilmour.

For starters, I like both men. Clark was a battered warrior for a long time, Gilmour was the toast of the town for a relatively short time and led the time as close to the Stanley Cup final as it has been in 41 years.

Were they as good as Tim Horton, Johnny Bower, Frank Mahovlich or Ted Kennedy, players previously honoured by the Leafs? Perhaps not.

But they were both better than Bill Barilko, a player who was never close to being an all-star, but one who scored one of the most important goals in Leaf history before dying tragically. That's Leaf history for you. In case you hadn't noticed, these aren't the storied Canadiens. The history is uneven, with great highs and terrible lows. It would be easy to slam MLSE for crass opportunism, for running two nights of misdirection to get people not to notice the state of the hockey club, but that unfairly undermines both players.

For four decades, it's been mostly lows for the Leafs, and probably the best any player can achieve against the backdrop of one of sports most poorly run franchises is to be beloved, revered and respected.

Clark and Gilmour, then, both fit the bill for special recognition, at least the Leaf bill. Next year is going to be a bleak one, and it'll do the team good to look forward to honouring two beloved and respected Leafs on separate nights.

The Next to Wear the "C"

Another weekend, another crazy Mats Sundin rumour.

It's been that way for a while, and it's going to stay that way until Sundin decides on his future, a decision that seems no closer today than it was in April July.

Good for him. The man's in a position to call the shots on his own career, and who among us wouldn't cherish such an opportunity.

The Maple Leafs are still hoping No. 13 will make the most illogical decision of all and return to them, perhaps so they can try to trade him for a third time next February.

That's at least part of the reason why the club hasn't named a new captain, a situation that may not change any time soon.

In fact, the current leadership vacuum is comparable to the period from 1986-89 when the Leafs didn't have a captain at all in the wake of a trade that sent 50-goal shooter Rick Vaive to Chicago. Eventually, the "C" was awarded for the 1989-90 season to Rob Ramage, a solid, veteran defenceman who became the first player in team history to be named captain without having played a single game for the team.

During the years in which the club didn't have a captain, there were young players like Wendel Clark, Gary Leeman, Al Iafrate and Russ Courtnall who were strong prospects but deemed to be too young to assume the leadership mantle left by Vaive.

Which brings us to today, a time when again the Leafs have many youngsters, none of whom have been through the wars enough to lead the team, and a large group of mostly undistinguished veterans. Assuming Sundin doesn't return, the most sensible choice might be to at least temporarily assign the captaincy on a rotating basis like teams such as Buffalo and Minnesota have done in recent seasons.

Then again, Cliff Fletcher's into bold decisions these days. If he and new head coach Ron Wilson decide there must be a captain for the 2008-09 season, here are the candidates:

-- Tomas Kaberle: Classy puck-moving defenceman is the longest-serving Leaf, although new backup goalie Curtis Joseph was on the roster when Kaberle broke into the Toronto lineup in 1998. Kaberle would be a quiet leader in the same mold as Sundin or Nicklas Lidstrom, although he's not been the player over the course of his career that they have been. The biggest problem might be that Kaberle was also on the trading block in February but refused to waive his no-trade clause.

-- Nik Antropov: Last year was his best, but it was just one year. Doesn't have the personality to serve as captain.

-- Vesa Toskala: Sorry, goalies can't be captains according to NHL rules.

-- Matt Stajan: Has many of the proper qualities, but still too young.

-- Alex Steen: His father, Tomas, served as Winnipeg's co-captain in the late 1980s. Unlike Stajan, however, Steen hasn't established himself as a credible leader inside the dressing room.

-- Bryan McCabe: No chance, although he's been an NHL captain before. McCabe is slated to be moved in a trade ASAP.

-- Carlo Colaiacovo: Has many of the best qualities, but would need to be healthy for a lengthy period to establish himself. Then again, Clark served as captain despite an injury-scarred career.

-- Jamal Mayers: The Leafs acquired the veteran winger for his experience and personality as much as his talent. Giving the "C" to Mayers would be like giving it to Ramage in '89, and we all know how the Leafs love to repeat history.

Winners and Losers. . .So Far

The Columbus Blue Jackets have never made the Stanley Cup playoffs in seven years of trying, the only NHL club never to have played a post-season match.

It's about time they tried to fix that problem.

And so, it's fair to say the moves made by Columbus GM Scott Howson so far, both trades and free-agent signings, have made the Jackets one of the big winners so far in the NHL off-season.

Howson has added free-agent scorer Kristian Huselius to give the team another gun to go with Rick Nash. The team's tattered blueline had been bolstered by the addition of free-agent Mike Commodore and ex-Rangers Fedor Tyutin and Christian Backman. Howson has also added through trade size on the wings in R.J. Umberger and Raffi Torres. Finally, the Jackets drafted the player thought by many to be the most talented forward last month in Ottawa in the form of Russian Nikita Filatov, who might even be able to crack the Columbus lineup next fall.

Not bad. To make those additions, the Jackets have surrendered young forwards Nikolai Zherdev, Dan Fritsche and Gilbert Brule, and lost free-agent rearguard Ron Hainsey to Atlanta. But with attendance waning, Nash a free agent after two more seasons and life tough in the improving Central Division, Howson had to make bold moves.

Interestingly, the Jackets are still $20 million below the league's salary cap, which means they've got to at least spend another $4 million to get to the minimum.

Bryan McCabe? Pavel Kubina?

The Pittsburgh Penguins, meanwhile, have lost four of their top 12 forwards and two of their top six so far, with Marian Hossa signing in Detroit, Ryan Malone and Adam Hall signing in Tampa Bay and Jarkko Ruutu doing a deal with Ottawa. Backup goalie Ty Conklin also signed with the Wings.

The Pens did re-sign defenceman Brooks Orpik and inked Evgeni Malkin to a new deal. Speculation has them chasing Vancouver winger Markus Naslund and maybe even Jaromir Jagr of the Rangers.

The Canucks, despite bold promises from new GM Mike Gillis that he would do what ex-GM Dave Nonis could not, have added only goalie Curtis Sanford and forwards Darcy Hordichuk, Kyle Wellwood and Ryan Johnson. Nonis was criticized for not adding big name forwards, and although Gillis has thrown a $20 million offer at Mats Sundin, he hasn't come up with the goods yet.

In New York, Zherdev and Fritsche came over from the Jackets, and Wade Redden was signed to a big deal. But Jagr's future is uncertain, Sean Avery is history and Sundin is only a possibility.

Still, there's more moves to come. So losers could yet become winners.

Fletcher At The Helm

As absurd as it sounds, the Maple Leafs might as well rip up Cliff Fletcher's 19-month contract.

And give him a five-year deal.

Whether you or I or most of the sharper minds in the hockey world think it would be smart to do doesn't matter a bit.

Those that run MLSE and the Leafs live in a bubble, totally removed from the realities of building championship teams. They do what they like in the way they like, knowing with confidence that their ever forgiving fans will happily buy tickets and t-shirts and merchandise no matter what is actually produced.

When it comes to Fletcher, however, it's clear the quaint notions of January in which he was presented as a fatherly figure, a Wayne Embry type, a temporary caretaker assigned the job of clearing the decks for a new Leaf management team, have completely evaporated.

Now, Fletcher is making major decisions with long-term implications. Just in buying out Darcy Tucker and signing Jeff Finger and Nicklas Hagman, Fletcher has tied up $7.75 million worth of Toronto cap space for the next four years at least.

He has signed a veteran coach, Ron Wilson, to a lucrative, long-term deal. He has bought out a 28-year-old backup goalie, Andrew Raycroft, and replaced him with 41-year-old Curtis Joseph, who couldn't find a job for the first half of last season. He has sacrificed two useful draft picks to move up in the '08 draft to select stay-at-home defenceman Luke Schenn, and dumped another third rounder to acquire winger Jamal Mayers. There's talk the Leafs may be pitching hard for defenceman Ron Hainsey, and the asking price is apparently something in the neighborhood of $5 million or more per season for six years or more.

These are all decisions, whether they're good ones or bad ones, that will affect the Leaf franchise for years. There are those conspiratorial types who believe Fletcher is really carrying out the wishes of Brian Burke, who would love to run the Leafs but can't right now.

But there's not a shred of evidence to support that theory.

As of now, there's no new hockey boss on the horizon. The Leafs aren't even looking anymore after saying publicly there were no candidates available good enough to take the job. That said, up-and-coming execs like Doug Armstrong, Dave Nonis, Brian Lawton and Tom Kurvers have all been hired to new jobs in recent days. None own the Stanley Cup ring as NHL general managers that the Leafs apparently cherish, but then again, none of the players Fletcher has acquired have championship pasts in NHL competition either.

All of this said, if they're going to let Fletcher make these major decisions, the only logical follow-up is to make him truly responsible for them by giving him a long-term deal to run the hockey club.

Of course, that would be idiotic to most thinking people. Moreover, most of the recent moves seem largely a smokescreen to cover up the fact that the jobs Fletcher was brought to Toronto to accomplish, specifically dump assets at the trade deadline for major gains and make sure Mats Sundin didn't walk on July 1st without the Leafs realizing something in return, were not accomplished.

That said, is giving Fletcher a long-term committment any sillier than letting the 72-year-old executive tie the hands of the next GM by spending millions of dollars on players and clogging up cap space with buyouts?

To be fair, Fletcher and the Leafs weren't the worst offenders on the first day of the NHL's silly season yesterday.

Washington believes the failed goaltender known as Jose Theodore is worth $4.5 million per season even though he's proven to be thoroughly unreliable. The Islanders spent a lot more on Mark Streit than the Leafs did on Finger. Boston blew their brains out to the tune of $4 million on Michael Ryder. The Rangers, by committing $11.5 million per season to Wade Redden and Michal Roszival, seem to be heading down the same slippery slope the Leafs did when they threw big money at Bryan McCabe, Tomas Kaberle, Pavel Kubina and Hal Gill.

The best decisions? Lou Lamoriello got a proven offensive performer in Brian Rolston, and a player who has played in New Jersey before. Edmonton's decision to bring in winger Erik Cole for underachieving Joni Pitkanen could pay major dividends.

The real winner yesterday, it seems, was the NHL Players Association, which now seems to be emerging as the long-term winner of the lockout, with even pedestrian athletes receiving enormous, multi-year contracts from foolhardly GMs.

The NHLPA has the option to re-open the current labour deal before it runs its full six-year length. My goodness, why would it do that? With teams like the Leafs still in the business of spending good money after bad, and with the payroll minimum now almost the same as the maximum the owners players were prepared to live with in order to end the lockout four years ago, NHL players are accruing riches at a staggering pace with no sensible end in sight.