Final: Leafs 3, Red Wings 2

Don't think anyone saw this one coming.

Nope. Didn't read those predictions from anyone that the Leafs would be able to stick with the defending champs from Detroit in their opening season, let alone beat 'em.

But beat 'em they did.

A heroic effort in the final 30 seconds with Detroit deploying all its stars and the Leafs shorthanded helped the Leafs hold on for the 3-2 victory.

Dominic Moore, as the new go-to faceoff man, beat Pavel Datsyuk on the draw cleanly in the final seconds, and Vesa Toskala was superb with 35 saves.

Nikolai Kulemin, meanwhile, apparently saved his talents for the regular season after a very quiet pre-season. He scored the winner, stealing an errant pass off the stick of Dan Cleary and beating Chris Osgood on a breakaway to give the Leafs a 3-1 lead in the third. Kulemin also set up the second Leaf goal, although he didn't draw an assist.

Leafs' 18-year-old rookie Luke Schenn skated 17 minutes and 30 seconds of very solid hockey in his NHL debut, giving the Leafs two freshmen to brag about on opening night.

A quiet hero, meanwhile, was defenceman Mike Van Ryn, who broke up a 3-on-1 break in the second and a dangerous Marian Hossa to Pavel Datsyuk play late in the third.

Imagine the emotional night it was for Ron Wilson, whose father Johnny and uncle Larry both played in Detroit. At 1-0, Wilson is off to the start he never could have imagined as Leaf head coach.

After two periods: Leafs 2, Red Wings 1

There's a storm coming.

The defending champion Red Wings, after all, are going to come at Vesa Toskala with guns a-blazing in the third.

Right now, they're being embarrassed on home ice by a Leaf team that most expect to finish in the bottom five of the NHL this season, hardly a fitting way in which to celebrate their newest Stanley Cup banner.

The Wings can blame dead legs and the pre-game ceremonies for their slow start, but behind 2-1 going into the third, they'll have no excuses if they can't put a lot of pressure on Toskala in the third.

Tomas Holmstrom's goal late in the third was a huge score for the Wings, who were dominated by the visitors for the first half of the second and fell behind 2-0.

Jiri Tlusty has been the most dangerous Leaf attacker so far, and rookie Nikolai Kulemin made a nifty play in the corner to get the puck back to Jonas Frogren to set up Dominic Moore's rebound goal, which briefly put the Leafs ahead by two goals.

The line of Tlusty, Grabovski and Niklas Hagman was the Leafs best, although it was on the ice chasing Pavel Datsyuk around on Holmstrom's goal.

Ferguson, the ex-Leaf GM, had to endure heckling from Leaf fans at The Joe during the second period. "Who let Ferguson in?" said one. "Fergie, I want a no-trade clause," shouted another.

To the question after the first from "Leaf Fan In Guelph," I didn't hear the new Hockey Night in Canada theme.

Will have to wait for that one.

If the Leafs can make this stand up in the third, this will be a better start to the season than Ron Wilson could possibly have imagined.

After one period: Leafs 1, Red Wings 0

Well, that's what Pavel Kubina gets for being such a generous fellow.

He gave up No. 31, the jersey number he wore last year in training camp, because he thought goalie Curtis Joseph should have his old number back for his second tour of duty.

For that good karma, Kubina was rewarded with the first Leaf goal of the season, a lovely gift from Detroit goalie Chris Osgood, to give the Leafs a 1-0 lead after one period against the defending champion Red Wings.

Osgood usually plays the puck very conservatively and intelligently, and it was bizarre to watch him sweep the puck right in front of his own net on to the stick of Kubina, who jammed it in.

The Wings outshot the Leafs 14-10 in the first period, but only held a small margin in play.

The Kubina goal was a power-play score with Tomas Kopecky off for interference in the offensive zone. As per the new NHL rule, the subsequent faceoff was held in the Detroit zone.

Leaf rookie Luke Schenn looked composed and confident, skating against Detroit's line of Henrik Zetterberg between Johan Franzen and Jiri Hudler in the first. His best play probably came in the second half of the period when Kopecky sliced between Schenn and partner Tomas Kaberle and headed for the Leaf net.

Instead of panicking or diving at Kopecky, Schenn went down on one knee to calmly cut off Kopecky's passing option and Vesa Toskala easily handled the backhand shot.

Jiri Tlusty, who helped create Kubina's goal by protecting the puck against Brad Stuart in the Detroit zone, had the next best Toronto chance of the period off a 2-on-1 with Mikhail Grabovski.

The Wings have split up Zetterberg and Pavel Datsyuk, at least to start the season.

Schenn played 6:02 in the first period.

Are you ready for some hockey?

Here in Detroit tonight they are introducing, one by one, every member of the Detroit organization that contributed to last year's Stanley Cup victory.

It's supposed to be a 12-minute ceremony. We'll see.

Thank goodness it isn't produced by Ken Dryden or we'd be here until the wee early hours of tomorrow.

Stay plugged into The Spin tonight for updates on the Maple Leafs' season opener live from The Joe in Detroit.

One strange item already. While the Leafs' haven't officially named a captain for the 2008-09 season, starting goaltender Vesa Toskala is listed as captain in the official NHL playing roster for the game.

The alternates are Tomas Kaberle, Jamal Mayers and Pavel Kubina.

Deposed Maple Leaf GM John Ferguson is in the press box in his new scouting post with San Jose, presumably to observe the product of his work in Toronto.

Talk to you after the first period!

Thursday Mail Bag

Holy smokes - talk about a week of tough questions on hockey history!

With the 2008-09 season now upon us, some readers are obviously in a reflective mood, looking back over the decades at Maple Leaf history as they contemplate the season ahead.

I’d like to think its going to be an interesting one, if only to see how players like Carlo Colaiacovo, Jiri Tlusty, Nikolai Kulemin, Mikhail Grabovski and Luke Schenn fare in this rebuilding campaign. The concern would be that the season will go south early and that the club will play a defensive style that won’t be very interesting to watch. But we’ll see. They may surprise.

Just as the potential dismissal of John Ferguson Jr. hung like a cloud over last year’s team from the outset, so too does the future of Cliff Fletcher, and possible hiring of Brian Burke, put an asterisk beside pretty much everything the club does this season.

It should be a season that at least allows fans to think about landing a top junior like John Tavares or Victor Hedman next June, but Fletcher has already dissed the draft as containing no star players and contemplated dealing away Toronto’s first round selection.

Head coach Ron Wilson says he doesn’t know how the team will do. Most of us can’t really imagine yet what kind of season this will be.

Now on to this week’s mail bag:


Q: It is always a pleasure to read your insights and amazing to read the frothing-at-the-mouth  comments of self-proclaimed experts who see fit to insult and to see conspiracies everywhere. On to real conspiracies:  the NHLPA seems to have extricated itself from its recent tumultuous  shenanigans and taken steps to ensure future credibility. Could you possibly summarize exactly  where the organization stands at present, who is on the executive, and what its revised role  is likely to mean to the players' well-being and to the well-being of the league as a whole?

Alexei Skakal, Tillsonburg

 A: Well, from the outside looking in, the NHLPA looks like it has finally extricated itself from the past and appears poised for a meaningful future. That, after the lockout, was by no means guaranteed. This was an organization that seemed, if not corrupt, certainly torn by internal division with a history of conflict between those who ran the organization and its membership.

Credit Chris Chelios, among others, with getting this union turned in the right direction. Paul Kelly is the executive director, but with nowhere near the individual power once accorded Alan Eagleson, Bob Goodenow or Ted Saskin. Ex-players Glenn Healy and Eric Lindros have signed on in executive positions, and the union recently hired a new advisory board of non-hockey people to provide advice from outside the hockey world. In general, power within the union is now spread among a variety of people and the membership, rather within the control of one man.

The future of the union remains unclear, and probably won’t be easy to observe until the next collective bargaining agreement negotiations. While less confrontational with the league than it was during the Goodenow years, the union seems to be taking more of an independent stance on a variety of issues these days. Kelly’s leadership style is still development, and it remains to be seen whether players will participate more in the process after so many were alienated during the lockout. But after years of internal troubles, there’s a sense the NHLPA is finally on the right track.


Q; Hey Damien, 
How about Jamal Mayers as captain of the Leafs?

Liam Kelly, Richmond Hill

A: Mayers comes to Toronto with a strong reputation as a leader and a person. He’s also a local lad, having grown up playing minor hockey in the city. As far as the captaincy, I’ve never endorsed the notion that someone could come to a team and in just a matter of weeks be rewarded with the captaincy. Having Craig Rivet named captain in Buffalo after arriving in July, for example, makes little sense, and Rivet’s a well-respected veteran just like Mayers. If Mayers earns the respect of his teammates over this season, then perhaps he’d be a more appropriate candidate for captain next summer.

Q: Damien I have two questions regarding NHL history. 
First, does the NHL recognize the current Ottawa Senators as Stanley Cup/NHL champions? NHL was founded in 1917, and the Senators won 4 cups in the following decade. In every list of Stanley Cup champions I see, Ottawa does not appear on these lists. Why is that? I realize it is a different franchise now, however numerous teams have changed ownership - and this does not reset their cup count.

Second, where was the Mutual Street Arena located? Obviously on Mutual Street, however I am unable to find an address/intersection anywhere on the internet. I even called MLSE and they rudely informed me "Mutual Street". I walk on Mutual Street everyday and always wonder where the first home of the Leafs is located.

Thanks!

Dan Ryan, Toronto

A: Man, talk about some tricky historical questions!

First, on the Senators. The NHL guide is a bit confusing, given that on the Senators main page history begins in 1992, but the Senators as Cup winners - and as the Silver Seven - are listed separately. Some sources suggest the NHL recognizes and credits those decades-old Cup championships with the current franchise, others don’t. The Senators are unusual in that they were defunct for almost 60 years, and its hard to see that as any kind of organizational continuity. The modern Sens, however, clearly see that history as their past. So it’s a matter of historical semantics, I guess. That’s not a great answer, but its the best I have.

I can do better, however, on the Mutual Street Arena. It was located on Mutual Street, just south of Dundas, on the site currently numbered as 88 Mutual Street, a condomium complex. At the entrance to that building, partially hidden by a hedge, is a plaque installed in 1992 that tells of the history of the arena once known as The Arena Gardens. In a nearby park, there are apparently some red bricks that were once part of the arena’s facade.

The original arena was built in 1911 with 8,000 seats for hockey. After the Leafs left for Maple Leaf Gardens in 1931, the arena went through several different lives and was renamed The Terrace in 1962, then demolished in 1989.

Q: As a long time suffering Leaf fan I do agree with Tanenbaum on being a competitive team like Detroit. That being said, do you agree that Toronto should go the Detroit direction. I know this team probably could not even win the Calder Cup but as a fan I would rather see long term gains and then short ones.The Leafs cupboard is dry. There are some nice pieces but far to short. Lastly, what do you think also the Leafs could get for Antropov?

Brian Marto, Toronto

 A: I think the Detroit model - skill above everything else - would be an excellent model to follow. But you have to understand the Wings, with most of the same people in place, have been working at this model for a quarter-century. They went an awfully long time under the ownership of Mike Ilitch before winning the Cup in 1997, and I find it hard to believe any owner of the Maple Leafs would ever have that kind of patience. After all, no GM since Jim Gregory has lasted longer than six years, a testament to the constantly changing direction of this hockey club.

As far as Antropov, I believe that a first round pick could be had at the trade deadline if he has the same kind of season he had last year. I think this guy’s a helluva player, but he’s not the future for the Leafs. Moreover, given the fact he’s an unrestricted free agent in July likely to command close to $4 million per season, I can’t imagine it would be smart for the Leafs to sign him to a multi-year deal.

Q: MLSE makes me wish for the days of Harold Ballard.  He may of been out there, but you may not agree with what he said, he was visible.  Where do you see the Maple Leafs ownership in 5 years?  Are we stuck with MLSE or is there a chance we could have new owners?  Also, who are the real candidates to purchase MLSE, Rogers is an obvious one, but who else?  Please say Jim Balsille.

Brian M, Barrie

A: There are always rumours, but nothing to suggest the Ontario Teachers Pension Fund, the majority owner of MLSE, is ready to divest anytime soon. Rocky financial times that many analysts foresee in the next year suggest that won’t change. Anything’s possible, but I would imagine that in five years, MLSE as currently constituted will still be in charge.

Q: Hey Damien. 
Your recent column on Leaf asset management got me thinking about what has occurred over the last two decades.  Over that period, the Leafs have missed the playoffs almost 1/3 of the time.  Other than what little they accomplished last season, the Gilmour trade in '96 and the Wregget trade in '89, they have not done a good job of "cashing in" players at the deadline to obtain draft picks.

Mr Fletcher has already shipped out the Leafs next two second round picks.  Over the last 20 years, the Leafs have only acquired 3 additional 2nd rounders, but have traded their own 11 times (plus the next two equals 13!).  Admittedly two of those picks were packaged to get additional first rounders in 92 and 93, but still!  What's worse...of the 12 second rounders they've used in those 20 years, only Felix Potvin and Stajan became useful players, and only Kulemin and Jimmy Hayes can still be considered prospects.  And I'm still waiting for Ken Spangler to make the blue line!  The question...we know that there have been several GMs since the late 80's...what has been the impact on the scouting staff?  Are the guys responsible for the drafting of the Peter Reynolds/John Doherty/Petr Svoboda/Marek Posmyk etc still around?  What about the pro scouts who thought Perreault was worth a 2nd rounder last year?  The GMs have paid a price, but what about the scouting staff?

Mike G, Owen Sound

A: This is such a good question - thanks Mike - and an area that is usually overlooked when it comes to understanding the inability of the Leafs to ice a consistent winner. I’ve been covering the team since 1989, and the turnover in both the amateur and pro scouting ranks has been constant. On the amateur side, I’ve known Floyd Smith, the late Pierre Dorion, Anders Hedberg, Mark Hillier, Barry Trapp and Dave Morrison all to have held the job as chief scout, which means an average of about three years per man. That’s the definition of instability, and its been the same story on the pro side. So basically when it comes around to deciding whether a group of draftees have turned out or not, the people who drafted them are usually long gone. It also means the organization’s philosophy on the types of players it wants is constantly changing, and your point about constantly dealing away high draft picks is well made and speaks to the difficult situation many of these scouts have inherited. Strangely, at a time when the salary cap system prevents the Leafs from using their financial muscle to buy players, the club has declined to pour all that money into scouting.

Q: About Alex Steen; last week you mentioned about the opportunities he had received, but underachieved. When Sundin went down at the end of the season, Steen looked very impressive. He took control of the team and, put up points, in my opinion was one of the better players. This seems to have gone unnoticed in light of the other controversy over the last few months. (GM, Sundin, coaching change, futures, potential rookies and missing the playoffs...again)

Also in his rookie season I feel he over-achieved for the same reason why Antropov did well last year. He played with Sundin quite a bit.
Steen seemed to thrive with the increased role at the end of the season and  Maurice gave him no chance. He was almost as bad as Quinn for only playing vets and giving the young guys only a few minutes a game.

I believe given an opportunity when he is leaned on again he may produce well. Am I alone? 
Also, a quick one. The more I watch him, the more a can't believe Antropov was drafted ahead of Simon Gagne. Okay, he is big, and he can deflect shots (not reflect as some people say, it is deflect) very well. However, he is among the slowest skaters in the league, plays with no intensity and his production dropped off to near zero when Maurice tried to spread the scoring around by moving him to the second line. In other words, he wasn't having a great year, Sundin was. Do scouts, teams and fans actually see some promise here? I admit he would be an average 2nd or third liner on most teams. but how much do you think another team could be fleeced for to get rid of this overrated pylon?

Kyle Bosley, Brockville

 Q: It’s an interesting comparison of two Leafs, and certainly, Kyle, beauty is in the eye of the beholder. Given a choice between Steen and Antropov, I would take Antropov every time. He’s far more skilled, bigger and has a nasty streak that the passive Steen just doesn’t seem to possess. That said, Steen is still developing, while it looks as though Antropov has about reached his potential. That’s why, as mentioned earlier, this would be a good time to move him, or at least move him this season.

I think Steen has had many opportunities, but I disagree that he’s made the best of them. Even last year, he had only 15 goals. That’s hardly a player taking advantage of anything. Right now, he appears to be a third liner heading into the season, and we’ll see if he can work his way on to the first or second units as the season progresses. 


Ask Damien

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

Click here to submit a question.

**Note: please follow the link above to send a question to Damien. Questions posted in the comments section may not make it to the mailbag. Thanks.**

On The Same Page

"We will make the playoffs and compete for the Stanley Cup."
--Former Leaf head coach Paul Maurice, Sept. 14, 2007.

"If you asked us if you were to pay for a Stanley Cup team this year but you were to be lousy for the next five years would you do it? The answer from an ownership point of view, absolutely not."
--MLSE chairman Larry Tanenbaum, Sept. 26, 2008

""Win this year and then next five years be last? For sure I'll take it."
--Leaf defenceman Pavel Kubina, Sept. 26, 2008.

"Wins and losses don't matter."
--New Leaf head coach Ron Wilson, Oct. 6, 2008

-------------------------------------
Not hard to see why people get confused.

The concepts, objectives and goals around the Maple Leafs are like shifting sands, more now than ever before. Clearly, much has changed in a calendar year, and while Ron Wilson was clearly being honest and straightforward through his "wins and losses don't matter" mantra for the season, that's not going to be easy for proud, veteran players to ingest before an 82-game season even starts.

It's a little different than "Win One for the Gipper" or "You Gotta Believe."

The concept of a slow, painful re-build is a noble one, one that should be supported after years of quick fixes and patches. When Wilson says "you guys can't be all out there bleating and writing in your papers that this team needs to bottom out and get high draft picks and build and then turn around and say they better win or else," he's sure not reading the right papers. There's nobody in town, really, suggesting the Leafs are pursuing an incorrect strategy by starting at the bottom again. Go ahead. If there's a commentator in the city who is arguing the Leafs should be trying to win now and make the playoffs, I'd like to know the name.

So it's certainly not the stated aspirations of the Leafs with which folks disagree.

It's how they go about it. And whether they have the internal discipline and sense of direction to get it done, not to mention the corporate will to get it done. Tanenbaum's pre-season comments, for sure, raised many an eyebrow, as did the apparent willingness of the front office to trade away next year's first round pick already to land an appealing but older prospect after trading off eight other draft picks over the past five months.

If Wilson thinks nobody's going to have an opinion about his team's methods, he's wrong. If he's hoping the scores don't get reported in the papers, or hoping nobody will say his team has played a bad game after it has played a bad game, he's wrong as well.

But nobody is saying "win or else," that's for sure.

Even last year, most media people and fans saw Maurice's comments for what they were, a fairly transparent effort to breathe some confidence into his squad.

But a forever hopeful Leaf fan would have reason to wonder why his or her team was trying to win the Cup last year, and now isn't even worried about winning any games at all, while the team's chairman apparently isn't willing to pursue the ultimate prize in the game if significant sacrifice goes along with it. The players are, just not the suits.

Oh yes, and the current GM is in power until, uh, when? Next week or next June or indefinitely. Yet interim/non-interim Cliff Fletcher is the one deciding that Luke Schenn must start in the NHL this season, again ignoring all the history of this team and the obvious reality that life for an 18-year-old NHL defenceman in Toronto is enormously different than for the same player in St. Louis, Atlanta and Los Angeles. It's nice that Alex Pietrangelo, Zach Bogosian and Drew Doughty get to start in the NHL this fall, but that has no bearing on the Leafs and Schenn, or should have no bearing. Nobody will even notice what those kids are doing right or wrong in those towns, while Schenn is going to find out what life is like under the microscope. Sure Scott Stevens broke in successfully as an 18-year-old blueliner in Washington a lifetime ago, but c'mon, nobody was even watching those Caps back then. Stevens could've shot the puck into his own net every night and it wouldn't have been even a note anywhere else.

Right now, you could have a spirited debate over which young Canadian-born defenceman, Dion Phaneuf, Marc Staal or Braydon Coburn, might be the first to win the Norris Trophy as the NHL's best defenceman. These guys are all that good.

Well, Phaneuf played four years of junior and moved into the NHL at age 20. Staal played four years of junior and entered the bigs at age 20. Coburn played five years of junior and was a semi-regular at age 21.

But these Leafs know better with a Kelowna youngster who was a second team WHL all-star a year ago in his third junior season and doesn't turn 19 until next month?

Rushing a kid is a slow, disciplined, patient re-build?

Wilson's right. It's not about wins and losses right now. It's about the decisions the team makes, and whether they dovetail with some kind of logical growth plan.

But Fletcher and Wilson have made their choice, and it sure would be terrific  to watch Schenn become the first 18-year-old rearguard in Leaf history to flourish immediately. Nobody wants to see Schenn fail, certainly not me. When I receive emails suggesting that I just disagree with whatever the Leafs do, or want the team to be unsuccessful, it is to laugh.

Clearly, 41 years of losing and being in the predicament they are now means they generally make the wrong decisions. When they start making better ones, I'll agree more often, I'm sure.

Otherwise, it's the same old story. Been there, got the t-shirt.

 

 

Thanks But No Thanks

Since 1967, NHL expansion has brought little to Canada, the game's heartland.

Well, except for six more Canadian-based teams, which would be more exciting if two of them hadn't been later hijacked by U.S. cities. Jobs for Canadians, too, have multiplied, from the 120 or so that existed almost exclusively for Canadian hockey players 40 years ago.

But in terms of Joe Fan, expansion has generally meant a dilution of the product, and created only a small group of non-Original Six U.S. cities that have significant relevance to the sport.

Philadelphia. Pittsburgh. Buffalo. Perhaps Colorado.

The rest? They've provided variety, I guess. But any one of the other American 16 born since '67 could disappear forever and not a Canadian tear would be seen.

Some of them - are you listening Nashville? - probably will disappear forever. In fact, the financial crunch being felt across the continent should be particularly unnerving to Canadian hockey fans in that, quite possibly, it may hasten yet another round of expansion.

Easy bucks, you see. And this time in Europe.

STAR PHOTO

Eugene Melnyk.

Now if you thoroughly enjoyed every second of the four games held in Prague and Stockholm on the weekend and couldn't imagine that the excitement could have been greater had they been held on North American soil, then Eugene Melnyk wants you.

The Ottawa owner believes Euro-expansion is "happening and it's going to happen."

Melnyk told reporters "it's just a matter of time."

"I am committed that my vote is in for European expansion," he said.

Interesting. Melnyk, arguably, saved hockey for Ottawa, but one must wonder?

What would adding NHL teams in Europe possibly do for the Ottawa hockey fan other than dilute the product? After all, we've already got their best players skating over here.

Having already lost one visit from Sidney Crosby this season through this year's pointless Euro-tour, Ottawa fans would be hard-pressed to imagine the benefits of having teams in Bern, Stockholm, Prague, Paris or Helsinki.

Ditto for fans in Toronto, Montreal, Vancouver, Edmonton and Calgary.

Now expansion fees, that's a different deal, and that's probably what Melnyk sniffs, and what might indeed interest a variety of NHL owners experiencing the shorts these days.

Gary Bettman keeps saying no, no, no, that expansion is not on the horizon. But now we have an influential owner saying yes, yes, yes.

From six to 12 to 14 to 16 to 18 to 21 to 22 to 24 to 26 to 30, the number of teams have relentlessly multiplied since '67 despite the fact pretty much everyone agrees the league would be so much stronger and more exciting with no more than 24.

Now what would Melnyk want it to be? At least 34, one would have to imagine, and probably something more along the lines of 40.

People keep saying Euro-expansion is going to happen, that there would be great benefits to being the first major sport to go full time across the Atlantic.

Still can't imagine what Joe Fan in the Great White North would get out of it.

Leafs should return Schenn to junior

For the Maple Leafs, history is something to be packaged and sold, never something to learn by.

They like to talk about the team's status as a famous, ancient franchise, but not about the 41 years without a Stanley Cup. They forgot why, after four Stanley Cups in the 1960s, they got rid of Punch Imlach, and were then stunned when Imlach didn't do a great job when he was hired again.

We've run into this dichotomy again at Leaf camp this year with the Luke Schenn debate, and we in the media are as much at fault as anyone else. Schenn is fresh and new, and thus a good story, and any mistakes he has been making have thus been papered over to serve the story.

The very same people that continually slam the Leafs for failing to draft and develop effectively are now suggesting the right move is to keep this teenage defenceman with the big club this season.

It's as though Jim Benning, Fred Boimistruck, Bob McGill, Gary Nylund, Luke Richardson, Al Iafrate, Drake Berehowsky and Jeff Ware, among others, never happened.

The Leafs only have one blue-chip prospect, and that's Schenn. Why would you risk anything with this young man? There's no risk sending him back to junior and having him lead the national junior team, and all kinds of risks inherent in keeping him in the NHL.

Why risk anything for a team that's not going to be very good at all this season? Marc Staal played four full years of junior and look how good he was in his first season last year with the Rangers. Look at the impact Dion Phaneuf made after four years of junior.

Then remember Rostislav Klesla, the fourth pick in 2000, rushed to the NHL by Columbus at age 18 after only one junior season in Brampton.

Ever hear people talk about Klesla as an impact defenceman anymore? And he was just as highly-touted as Schenn.

But Schenn is a lot more interesting than, say, Mike Van Ryn or Jonas Frogren. Moreover, the Leafs are going to say only positive things publicly about Schenn, so that gets turned into a story about how the kid is wonderfully ready.

Folks - reality check time. It doesn't matter how good Schenn is now. It matters only how good he is by age 24 or 25 when the team, possibly, is back to contender status.

It just shouldn't matter whether he's capable of playing in the NHL right now. The young man could be a treasure, and that needs to be handled with care.

To be fair, neither Ron Wilson nor Cliff Fletcher has committed either way on Schenn, so perhaps there's still time for common sense to prevail.

Having seen this exact same episode played over and over with the Leafs, however, it seems common sense always ends up losing.

It's always going to be different this time with this kid. This kid's more mature. This kid can handle playing against men.

We've heard the same thing so many, many times.

Leaf fans should rejoice in the fact that the team, it would appear, has drafted a bona fide stud to build the blueline around. If it all pans out, he'll be a fixture for a decade or more.

Which means letting him to continue to develop in junior hockey for one more year is the right thing to do.

Thursday Mail Bag

There’s never any shortage of hockey optimism at this time of year. Everyone’s unbeaten. Every team is tied for first. Even the longest longshot can point to some team in history and believe it could be that team this season in the NHL if everything goes right.
It’s the time of year for best-case scenarios. If so-and-so stays healthy. If this kid or that rookie is ready. If, if, if. . .
The only team without major ifs seems to be the defending champion Red Wings, but the champs almost always look that way, don’t they? Their excellence is still fresh in our minds, and with specific respect to Detroit, this is a team that lost little - Dominik Hasek, Dallas Drake - and appears to own a slew of new, young talent.
Columbus is still looking for its first playoff berth. So is Wayne Gretzky, at least as a coach. Optimism is high in Montreal, the centre of the hockey universe this year with the draft, the all-star game and the 100th anniversary of hockey’s most successful franchise.
So too do many hold out hope for the Maple Leafs, if not to win a lot of games, then to continue a process of adding young talent over a period of time to mould the club back into contender status. The Leafs have as many question marks as any team in hockey, so naturally, they’ll be the primary focus of the mail bag again this season. We had phenomenal response from interested readers around the world last season, and look forward to more of the same. Passion for the sport and NHL teams in Canada has never been higher, a passion reflected every week in this mail bag.
So let’s get started. Just 82 games each for 30 clubs to go. Then the playoffs. Then a chance to look back and be amazed as just how little we understood when it all started.

On to this week’s mail bag:

Q: O Tanenbaum.

When will this guy learn just to shut up! Honestly - if he doesn't realize he can't win no matter what he says - he has the temerity to lay an egg like the one this week about a consistently competitive team? Teams are turning themselves around in less than an off-season with their management teams knowing how to position themselves in this salary cap era - witness the Flyers and this year the Lightning. I guess it's the burden of the Leaf fan to be thinking about a March trade deadline in October - thanks to Larry's competitive streak, no doubt - but wanted to know - will the Leafs be able to trabe Kubby and Vesa at the trade deadline - and I guess Yzerman coming in is simply a pipe dream now? Your thoughts?

Gerry Willan, Voorhees, N

A: This is going to sound like a bit of a broken record, but no-trade clauses, and the ability of the Leafs to get around them, will again be a major factor in how the club is able to turn veteran assets into futures. Both Tomas Kaberle and Pavel Kubina have no trade clauses. Nik Antropov doesn’t, and he’s an unrestricted free agent in July. If the season goes as many believe it should - and as many desperately want it to go - the Leafs will have ample opportunities at and before the February trade deadline to so some very interesting things to help the club.

Steve Yzerman, in my mind, would be a tremendous executive catch for the Leafs. Yzerman’s resume is growing, and he’s smart enough after his years in Detroit to know that surrounding yourself with good people is how to develop a winning team. It’s not just about one guy. Chairman Larry Tanenbaum, however, has already rejected Yzerman as a potential candidate, saying the team won’t go with another rookie again. Why Tanenbaum had to throw one of the country’s national hockey treasures under the bus to make a point about John Ferguson Jr. is anyone’s guess.