Thursday Mail Bag

It’s not exactly do or die time for Justin Pogge.

But its time for the kid to make a statement.

TONY BOCK/TORONTO STAR

It's Pogge's time to make a statement that he's an NHLer.

We’ve seen him come up to the NHL on multiple occasions, do okay at times, but generally not do a whole lot to convince anyone he’s the answer in the near future for the Maple Leafs in goal.

Now, with Martin Gerber having acted like a complete idiot over a goal that, in my opinion, was correctly counted as legal, Pogge gets another shot.

So Gerber’s suspended, Vesa Toskala is out for the year and Curtis Joseph apparently is only trusted to play once in a blue moon.

How much opportunity does Pogge need? Here’s a chance to grab the bull by the horns and make the Leafs believe he can be something significant next year and beyond.

Right now, it’s doubtful he’ll even be the NHL backup to Toskala right now. But he can change that over the next week.

It’s up to him now, and time to stop holding his hand and start demanding results.

Now on to this week’s mail bag:

Q: Hi Damien, this question may have come up before so I apologize for the duplication. Don Cherry really seems to have it in for Ron Wilson. Do you know why or how this little feud originated? Did they butt heads some time in the past?

Michael Manno, Toronto

A: I don’t know what created this mini-feud, although I do think

Wilson has done well to pretty much ignore all the barbs thrown his way by Cherry this season. They certainly aren’t of the same mind when it comes to the way the game should be played or coached, with Wilson one of the more innovative, cutting edge coaches around. Cherry doesn’t seem to like Wilson’s attitude or manner, and I can tell you this – he’s not the only one in hockey that feels that way. The Leaf coach tends to rub people the wrong way.

Q: If an NHL team is worried about a falling cap number and committing dollars to a free agrent which squeezes room for other players, why not sign contracts where the salary is a percentage of the cap number and not a flat amount. It probably makes sense to assign all players a percentage of the cap and you don't have to worry about being squeezed. (Provided the GM isn't Max Bialystock and his assistant isn't Leo Bloom.)

James Piper, Kitchener

A: Yes, if it were only so that we knew those who have run the Leafs for the past 40 years were simply channeling The Producers. It would all make so much more sense.

Basically, what you’re suggesting is an interesting idea, but not legal under the current collective bargaining agreement. Each player must have defined salary and number for cap purposes. The only way in which a percentage of the cap can be used is to generate the maximum salary allowable, which can be no more than 20 per cent of the maximum cap figure for any individual.

Q: Damien, very much enjoy the questions and your answers in your blog. My question refers to the loss of Dominic Moore who I thought was the best Leaf player most nights this season. Is there any reason why a new contract could not have been structured to pay him, for example, 2.5 million next year, 1.5 million the year after, and 1 million the third year? MLSE has lots of money and cap space for next year. The last two years address the possible lower cap and salary additions during the following two seasons while allowing the Leafs to keep a very talented player and still give him close to what he was asking. He gets much of his money up front don't see a problem that way.

Would this type of contract violate any NHL rules or be an issue for the players association or do you see any other reasons why it would not have been a solution to the stalemate? Is there a maximum decrease per year that might come into play?

It is hard for me to believe that a proven effective younger NHL player is not much more valuable than a second round draft choice who probably isn't a Leaf for three or four years if ever.

Thanks,

Don Jones, Vineland

A: There is certainly nothing illegal under current CBA rules about the type of contract you suggested.

Moore, however, was looking for more than the approximately $1.7 million average salary that your figures would have produced. He was somewhere around $2.3 million average, which was more than the Leafs were willing to pay.

Interestingly, Moore has one goal and two assists in eight games with the Sabres while averaging around 13-16 minutes of ice time and without getting the power play opportunities he was getting before. The Leafs believed his offensive numbers were artificially inflated by the fact he was playing much higher in the lineup than he would have on a better team.

As far as the draft pick, if you’re going to see a second round pick as basically worthless, then this kind of deal wouldn’t appeal to you. In my mind, having a good collection of draft picks every year just increases your chances of finding better players. If you constantly have few picks, the draft isn’t going to pay dividends. At the end of the day, I think there’s a chance the Leafs could end up with the pick AND Moore. They have an interest in signing him as a free agent this summer.

Q: Hey Damien,

Obviously you are anti-fighting and I am admittedly pro-fighting. My reasoning is it cuts down on stick work, allows players to police themselves, and can change the momentum of a game. I understand that you disagree with those reasons and respect that. My question is have you never seen a fight that has had an impact on a game?

Also, I am curious to what got you into covering sports. Did you cheer for the Leafs or play hockey as a kid? I am curious why you got into reporting. Thank you.

Blake Hannesson, New Fairfield, CT

A: For the most part, Blake, I don’t buy those reasons that you cite for fighting, so I guess we’ll just disagree. The fact that there is basically no fighting in the playoffs, the Olympics, the World Cup etc., but there is no corresponding increase in stick work, etc., suggests to me that the “policeman” logic is just a way to try and legitimize something.

Have I seen fights that impact games? Can’t think of one, although I’m not saying it never happens. I’m saying it might be one per cent of all fights, at best. It always makes me chuckle that both Tampa Bay and Calgary claimed that the big Jarome Iginla-Vinny Lecavalier scrap in the 2004 Stanley Cup final was a key turning point for their team. Does that mean Calgary was wrong because Tampa won the series?

As far as my personal history, I got into covering sports in 1989 after five years at the Star covering news. I had my eye on political reporting, but given an opportunity in sports, I jumped at it and have never looked back. I’ve played hockey all my life, if that helps.

Q: Hi Damien,

I hope you can explain this to me because I'm absolutely dumb-founded. Why do the Leafs insist on putting players in their 30s on the ice with the game on the line? Why aren't we living and dying with the kids/prospects? (March 24) Kubina scored from Blake on a power play with two minutes left in the game. Same story in Ottawa a month ago, and Florida a couple weeks ago. If you're pushing for a goal why not a first power-play unit of White, Stralman, Kulemin, Grabo, Mitchell (nobody over 24, all could be around by the time the leafs are good again).

If the kids learn to get it done, great! We've got a solid foundation to build on. If they don't, great! That's three more losses, and as of (March 25), three draft slots higher. In other words we improve the young core one way (by giving them experience) or another (by getting a better draft choice to add to the existing group) by giving them the opportunity to lead this team. I'm not saying tank, but I'm saying live or die with the kids. Why is Wilson so determined to squeeze every useless point out of this roster at the expense of the future?

Bradley Meldrew, Toronto

A: I don’t want a coach who isn’t trying to win every game. Period. The kids are getting lots of playing time and lots of opportunities in a variety of situations. They get as much out of being part of a winning effort as anyone, and the idea is with any team to mesh experience and youth. If the young players weren’t playing as much as they are then I think you’d have an argument. But six players have scored their first NHL goal with the Leafs this season, an indication that youth is being served.

Q: If we wanted to make fighting in the NHL safer, we could have it so that to initiate a fight, a player throws his glove down at the feet of his intended target; then if the other player wishes to fight, he can ring a bell located at the penalty box. This will stop the game, and cause a portable boxing ring (padded floor) to roll out onto the ice, complete with ropes and a ref. The players would have to don special helmets and gloves; then the ref would ring the bell again to start the fight. The fight would end when someone gets knocked to the ground; then all of it would be put away, the fighters would each get 10-minute misconducts, and the game would continue.

Robert B., Oshawa

A: Will there be ring girls?

Q: Hi Damien,

The Alex Ovechkin/Don Cherry soap opera is quite entertaining. I have a suspicion what your opinion is on the matter and have read what some NHL players think but what about other journalists? Is Cherry seen as out of touch by younger journalists?

While watching Coaches Corner this evening I found it rather ironic that he thought the Oilers team huddle/dance/jump celebration at the end of a winning game was a great celebration yet Ovechkin is over the top.

Todd Carlson, Burk's Falls

A: I can’t really speak for journalists in general or younger journalists in particular. This is one topic where I am actually in agreement to a large extent with Cherry, which may put us both in the minority. I think there’s fine line between being excited and passionate and being disrespectful to your opponent. To me, its what a player does during play that matters, not how he celebrates. People go to games to watch Ovechkin score, not to play-act after goals.

Q: Doesn't Don Cherry's negative comments about Ovechkin's post-goal celebrations seem quite hypocritical? What if someone criticized Cherry for wearing attention-getting, flamboyant clothing? Cherry would say that's his schtick and part of his persona, he'd say it's what his fans want to see and that it contributes to the ratings for Coach's Corner. The same is true for Ovechkin's entertaining antics. I like Don Cherry and don't want him to change, but he should be embarrassed about his glib hypocritical opinion about Ovie.

Geoff Clarke, Toronto

A: I think Cherry is paid to be flamboyant, outspoken and outrageous. I don’t think being consistent or fair is on his job description. And I find it amazing that he is able to generate so much attention by simply saying things about a top player like Ovechkin. You can never say people don’t care what Grapes has to say.

Q: Hi Damien,

I know I'm not the only one left wondering what has happened to cause the Habs' meltdown this season; we've heard about the porous defence, the utter collapse of Carey Price, and under-performing stars like Kovalev, but I can't make out the confluence of factors which caused this downfall. Do you think the Habs' situation right now is at all comparable to Ottawa 's collapse last season? In Ottawa's case, the downfall is often attributed to the loss of secondary, albeit key players who played specific roles, and I wonder if Montreal is now missing Souray and Streit more than they thought they were going to. Also, I'm not overly familiar with the Habs' depth in upcoming talent, but if they miss the playoffs this season, should Gainey (if he still has the job) consider blowing this team up?

J.P. Nikota,London

A: There certainly do seem to be parallels between the two situations. I wonder about goaltending being at the root of the problem in both cities, and I wonder about the dynamic of a lot of young players getting very rich at the same time and how that affects a team. More than anything, both situations seem to show how getting a team to excel may, in many cases, be more of a snapshot than a well-established picture, that getting a group of players to all buy into the same plan and same level of commitment may be, for most teams, fleeting.

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.**

Comments

[ray b]

No way that's a goal..Laich pretty much pitchforked Gerber into the net..If he put his stick on a guy like that at center ice, its a penalty..

[Rob]

Gerber didn't act like an idiot. He acted like a professional athlete in the middle of a frenzied finish where he felt he was ripped off by an allowed goal. Calling him an idiot just shows why journalists don't understand what really happens on the ice. Journalists are not athletes.

[mark]

As a Leafs fan I find both Ottawa and Montreal's collapse amusing. In my opinion both can be traced directly to goaltending (or lack thereof). They seem to chew up and spit out talented young goaltenders at an alarming rate. There may be those who feel Toronto is being too tentative in handling Pogge...but if the alternative looks like that the approach deployed by Montreal and Ottawa, I think I prefer the way the Leafs are going about their business.

[Peter]

Damien,

please explain to me how that was a goal? the puck was under Gerber's pad and even if the ref saw it, Laich couldn't. He just pushed Gerber into the net with the puck under him. i don't think that's a legal way of scoring a goal. and calling him an idiot because he got upset by this, is just plain wrong.

[A-Mar]

I will have to sit on the fence on the Gerber issue. I disagree in that there's no way that was a legit goal. The puck was under Gerber and Laich essentially pushed Gerber over the goal line thus moving the puck in as well. Where was the whistle? You can't see the puck until Gerber has been knocked over. You can bet that St. Brodeur would've taken issue with that play.
I don't condone Gerber's behaviour although I can understand where he's coming from. Shooting the puck was asinine but I don't believe for a second that he shoved Mike Leggo. Watched the replay a whole bunch and it looks like they bumped when Gerber tried to head him off to argue. Yeah, contact with official=ejection/suspension... but I can't help but feel like the Leafs got hosed on that one.

[Dave]

Damian,
In regards to Dominic Moore you said "The Leafs believed his offensive numbers were artificially inflated by the fact he was playing much higher in the lineup than he would have on a better team."

Isn't this true of every player? I would think that any player who plays higher in the lineup will get more points. If they get more points then perhaps they belong on the power play.

Are they suggesting that he should have gotten more points then he got?

[general borschevsky]

Sorry Damien, but only an idiot would think pithforking a goalie in the junk and pushing him into the net while the puck is underneath him is "correctly counted as legal". You're a fraud that actually knows nothing about hockey and when you make statements like that you give yourself away.

[Codey Atiyeh]

dude man damien
that goal shouldnt have counted
if you seen it right you would have noticed that buddy pushed gerber into the net and ref was to stupid to call the penalty
so ya if i was gerber i would have done the same thing because its pretty obvious that the ref didnt call it because it was toronto's penalty for the last mionute or so

[Nick]

That wasn't a goal, at no point during any replay could you see the puck loose. It was under gerber, who was subsequently shovelled into the net and that is why the IDIOT ref called it a goal.

[DamienCox]

Damien here. . .okay, two separate issues here, folks.
First, puck was loose, not covered. Player bangs it over line. Good goal. Rest is just usual whining from Leaf fans who still want to talk about Kerry Fraser's non-call on Gretzky high stick in '93 playoffs. If it was the Leafs trying to score and the ref waved it off on same play, we'd here no end of whining from Leaf fans about how it was a good goal.
Some things never change.
Second, even if call was wrong, there's no reason for Gerber to bump the ref, and definitely no reason to shoot the puck at the official. He's a veteran player who should know better. Two points were still very much available to his team, and he jeopardized that by getting booted out and forcing the Leafs to put a very cold Curtis Joseph in.
That Cujo miraculously saved the day is of enormous credit to him, but doesn't make Gerber any less of an idiot for what he did.

[Steve]

Calling Gerber an 'idiot' for reacting to what even you clearly imply was an arguable call - ***in the deciding last seconds of the game, no less!*** - is uncalled for, unprofessional, lazy and well...idiotic.

Granted, firing the puck in the direction of the official is unacceptable but there are many more possible (and severe) actions/game conditions that should be reserved for being tagged with such a condescending label from a 'journalist'.

[general borschevsky]

It isn't November anymore. These games don't matter. What does matter is having players who show a little passion and spirit. Too often last year the Leafs would just accept it when they were getting screwed. Gerber's reaction was entirely appropriate.

[DamienCox]

Damien here. . .too funny. . .guys who define shooting a puck at a referee as showing "passion and spirit".
Well, why not go hit the ref with a nice two-hander? That would be really spirited!

[Peter]

Damien,
yeah, the puck was loose but the player didn't touch the puck. he shoved the goalie into the net with the puck. that's not a goal. so questioning a blown call is whining? give me a break...

[mf37]

Three separate issues here Damien.

First, if video evidence exists of a loose puck, I'd love to see it. It certainly wasn't available or broadcast during the game. Can you let me know where you saw the so-called loose puck? Second, "idiot" is a pretty loaded word. Players do a lot of stupid things in the heat of the moment and I'll take Gerber's passion any day. Third, what's with the constant attacks on Leaf fans? Folks disagree with your assessment of a goal and you drop 1993, Gretzky and Fraser on them? I'm surprised you didn't shoehorn a "1967" or "42 years" into your response. Such a simple minded response from you is really unbecoming, but as you said, "some things never change"

[Craig "Teddy" Tedford]

Good mailbag as always, Damien. On the history issue, I was just wondering if you ever wish that you stuck with covering politics rather than sports? I am a Leafs fan, but it seems like there are only so many mediocre seasons that you can follow (let alone report on every single day) before it starts to get extremely tiresome.

[jaredoflondon]

silly Damien, He wasn't shooting the puck at the ref, he was passing it to him for the opening faceoff, why do you always have to be so negative?

[Hockey Fan]

Yes I think Gerber should be suspended for making contact with the ref, although it looked more like a bump than a push.... but, no way was that goal. You say that he shot it over the line... please check the replay and post a snap shot of where his stick touched the puck. His stick pitchforked Gerber and pushed him into the net.

[Gman]

Damien, I'm an old lax netminder, and, though it's not the professional or clearheaded thing to do, there are times when ya gotta do the Billy Smith thing or beyond. The call was iffy enough (loose, covered, whatever, I thought everybody lost sight of it and it shoulda been whistled) that vociferous dissatisfaction was called for. That kind of fire tells me Gerber has the pepper to give Toskala a fight in camp.

Heckski, I woulda fired sticks at the zebra from the bench if I'd been in Ron's shoes, flipped him the bird and put itching powder in his jock for the next game.

[Fuzzy Pete]

Damien,
Hopefully you haven't turned your computer off. How would you feel about the refs being available for questions from the press after the game? Personally, I think fans would be less frustrated if they new what the refs were seeing and thinking during a questionable call.

[John]

Damien, I would say you know hockey, but you don't. The goal against Gerber was utter bullsh*t and the NHL should be suspending the ref for letting that go. There was ZERO sight of the puck on video replay, so why he wouldn't call it is beyond me. Unless he has X-ray vision, that play is dead. If you can show me where you see the puck crossing the line in full view I'll buy you lunch.

[DamienCox]

Damien here. . .in answer to Fuzzy Pete, the referees are often available for questions after a game depending on the situation. If they aren't and a official supervisor is on hand, he'll give the interpretation.
So the answer is almost always available one way or another. In this case, the answer was that the referee thought the play was still alive. He might have been incorrect, but that was the call he made. Pretty straightforward.

[Fraser]

I think Burke's played the Dominic Moore situation perfectly. By trading Moore when he did he got a 2nd rounder (which a year ago would have been an absurdity). Secondly, he took a gamble, albeit a pretty safe one, that Moore's numbers outside of Toronto would drop significantly and as a result would put a dent into his free agent value. Hopefully when he tests out the free agent market this summer he may come back to the Leafs when he realizes he can't get what he's asking for anywhere else. Who knows, he might find a taker somewhere, but best case scenario is that we get a discounted Moore and a 2nd rounder out of it. I think he's a great player but still not worth what he was asking.

[Fuzzy Pete]

Thanks Damien,
I didn't know that. It's too bad they never televise those interviews. I really think that fans would be more understanding if they heard the refs explanation directly.

[Tim H.]

Two things Damien:

1) You should talk to your buddy Doug Smith's techies, so that they can show you how to add a Blogger's note to the bottom of any comment posted. That way, you don't need to 'comment' in your own blog! (Just trying to get some props for Doug!)

2) I really do think that it is unprofessional for a journalist to call ANY PERSON an idiot, because of one incident thast took several seconds of their long life. If you thing that Gerber's ACTIONS in that situation were IDIOTIC, then I agree. But if you want to claim that he was, is and always will be an idiot because of what he did in those few seconds, then I would say that that is a pretty IDIOTIC statement.

Thanks for listening! (reading?)