Thursday Mail Bag

By this time next week, the Maple Leafs will either have won a couple of hockey games and ended their terrible slide or they’ll have slipped even deeper into the large hole they’ve dug for themselves in October.

But I really don’t believe they’re this bad. Moreover, even lousy hockey teams usually feature a player or two that either excels amidst the mediocrity or plays so selfishly that they’re able to rack up some good numbers.

Right now, there’s not a Leaf having a decent year, let alone a good one. That has to end at some point.

More important, sometime during the upcoming five-game trip, one or both of Vesa Toskala and Jonas Gustavsson will be back in the net for the Leafs. While Toskala hasn’t been good this season, he’s better than Joey McDonald, and Gustavsson offers a real possibility that the Leafs might own a true No. 1 goalie if they can ever get him healthy.

So by this time next week, the Leafs may have a win, their goaltending may be coming back together and somebody, either a forward or a defenceman, will have started to make a positive impact.

That’s all progress. Unless, of course, none of it actually happens.

Now on to this week’s mail bag:

Q; Damien, with the Leafs going 6-3 in the pre-season using all the "younger guys" - I know it was only pre-season - but their team game on both sides of the puck was more exciting and the effort (hustle) was there game in and game out. (I enjoyed watching them, now not so much). I think the time has come for Burke to forget about the contract issues he has and bring back the "Young Guns". Let's see what they can do for the year and if we end up in last place we still have Phil Kessell (not a bad first rounder). Please Mr Burke let's reload the guns and restart the hunt.

Mark Pettigrew, Kitchener, Ont.

A: Well, for starters, I think you’re going to see all of those younger players as the year progresses. In fact, Tyler Bozak has already played, Viktor Stalberg is on the roster and Christian Hanson is working on his game in the AHL. If you’re referring to Nazem Kadri, it was clearly the smart move to send him back to the OHL. All you have to do is look at the struggles Luke Schenn is having this season to understand being rushed as an 18-year-old often causes a lot more problems than seem evident at first.

That said, I think, Mark, that people should also understand clearly now that the pre-season has only a passing resemblance to the regular season. So successes in September don’t necessarily translate into successes in October and beyond. Really, going 6-3 in the pre-season meant nothing, which also means that evaluating players solely on how they played in those games doesn’t make a lot of sense either. Stalberg deserved to make the NHL roster, but he’s not quite the same scoring star anymore now that he’s facing live bullets, is he? Making decisions based on those exhibition tilts rarely helps.

Q: Hello Damien. I was just wondering how a team that went 6-3 in the pre-season can look so bad a mere few weeks later. The Leafs were really very good in the pre-season as we saw, and it's about more than just winning. The team was in synch, they were skating, hitting, and fights were far more spontaneous than staged. Could the OT loss to Montreal have broken the confidence of a team so soon? Or is this just a case of the world's worst slumps all happening at once? Should they just bring up half the Marlies' roster and see what happens? I am at a loss, and I follow this team very closely. Your thoughts?

Joe Scott, London, Ont.

A: To some extent, I already answered this, suggesting that far too much is made out of pre-season results. I mean, you have to look at the opposition roster as well, and its rarely truly an NHL calibre squad. You can’t be fooled by that.

In terms of the current losing streak, most teams will have a streak like this during the season. It’s just magnified when it happens right out of the gate. Look at New Jersey. The Devils lost six straight in late March/early April last year, but they were still a 106-point club. The Leafs simply haven’t had NHL calibre goaltending for most of the season, and that colors everything. That said, where’s the effort? Where’s the urgency and the desperation? People wonder about why this team doesn’t have a captain, a designated leader. I wonder more about whether there are too many players on the current roster that can’t be led.

Q: At the start of the season I agreed with the "competition" philosophy instilled by Burke and Wilson but now I'm starting to think, is it really that beneficial?  Competition is great but job security is also great.  These players look too tense out there, reminds me of a fugitive always looking over their shoulders, eventually they will make a mistake. Your thoughts?

Justin Minks, Toronto

A: I don’t see tension. I see uncertainty, confusion and players stepping outside their areas of responsibility and making errors. Much of this is caused by the goaltending problems. You see Mike Komisarek running around because he’s getting little help from the forwards and knows if he even allows a shot on his goal, it may go in. Internal competition on any team is always a good thing, doubly so on a club like this on which so few have accomplished much if anything at the NHL level.

Q: RE: the NHLPA. Gretzky seems to have some time on his hands and does have some clout. Was he active in the PA as a player, and would he be of any help to this ship of fools?

Steve H., Sudbury, Ont.

A: I can’t imagine Gretzky would want any part of this. Moreover, Glenn Healy has made it clear that the current administration headed by Ian Penny seems to believe Gretzky did not contribute significantly to the health of the union during his playing days. Why would Gretzky want to help these morons?

Q: Love the blog and perhaps the only independent view on the Leafs in the city. Last year, the Leafs could have sent Schenn back to junior after 9 games and not have it count towards service time for free agency. 

Is that option still available?  Could they send him to the Marlies now and if they keep him their all year, save a year of service time?  If so, I have to think that would be the best thing for everyone.  The kid is game, but physically and mentally a step slow in the NHL and that is not a knock on him, considering he's 19 and not supposed to be ready.  To put him with his peers where he can develop under less pressure this year and get tons of special teams minutes seems like the way to go regardless of whether the Leafs think they can make the playoffs this year.  Surely Exelby and/or Frogren can do no worse than what Schenn has shown so far at the NHL level.

James Hodgins, Stouffville, Ont.

A: Yes, they can send him to the Marlies. But it would still count as a year on his existing contract. See, that’s another problem with elevating 18-year-olds so quickly. They become free agents by age 25. So while Colorado, for example, can understandably be excited that Matt Duchene and Ryan O’Reilly have made the grade so early, both will be free agents at 25. How does that help a team trying to build its way back to contention? Moreover, what does it gain? The Leafs weren’t going to win the Cup last year with Schenn and the Avs aren’t going to win it this year with Duchene and O’Reilly. Colorado, at least, has attendance concerns, and so it can argue it needed these young faces to start winning over fans again. But the Leafs have no such concerns. They just did it to try and prove they’d picked well in the June draft by sacrificing picks to move up and grab Schenn. It’s not exactly blowing up in their faces - Schenn is still a very good prospect - but the down side of the decision is now becoming clear. And he’ll be a free agent at 25. But I would indeed have him in the minors now. The kid has a lot to learn and needs to feel as though he can be a dominant player, just like he was in junior.

Q: Damien,
Your comments on 'The Reporters' with respect to the in-game entertainment at Leafs games was dead on! Thank you for being my voice. I've been to many games at many different rinks around the league and I can tell you that the Toronto 'show' is a national embarrassment. I mean seriously, this is supposed to be the heart of hockey and you go to a Leaf game and you want to fall asleep. In, addition, they try to dumb down the audience during breaks with loud rap music and cheesy giveaways where the audience just sits there dociled out of their minds and stare at the big screen. Somehow they need to bring back some tradition.

You go to a Rangers game and it's awesome compared to this. Please be more vocal on this topic. This is hockey mad Toronto and we should represent so much better.

Darren Burton, Toronto

A: Thanks Darren. Maybe I just see too many Leaf games, but what I see in terms of the in-game entertainment is nightmarishly bad, often boring and frequently juvenile. It’s another expression of MLSE’s contempt for the customer, but as long as the customer continues to buy, why would MLSE possibly change?

Q: Hi Damien,
Can I ask what is the deal with the 16, 17 year anniversaries for Toronto teams?  First with the Blue Jays, and now, watching the Rangers game last Saturday, the Leafs feel the need to honour a team that accomplished what exactly? 

Being a passionate Toronto sports fan, I could maybe understand the Blue Jays celebration, as they actually won something, but the Leafs?

Everyone else is already laughing at us Leaf fans, and it certainly isn't going to get better with these celebrations of "almost" great teams, that came close to having a chance to win something.

Last time I checked, there was no Dean's list, or honours award for a C student.  I can't wait for 5 years from now, when we see Gary Valk and Travis Green paraded out, for helping get one win over the halfway mark to the Stanley Cup in 2001.

David Taylor, Calgary

A: On one hand, I agree with you. Moderate accomplishments should not be treated like monumental achievements. I think the Leafs hit rock bottom in this regard several years ago when they feted Tie Domi for his 1,000th NHL game. At the same time, I don’t mind an ex-Leaf dropping the puck or being acknowledged at a home game in a small way. Players should feel special to have worn the jersey. I just wonder why the only highlight these people seem to have of Felix Potvin is a fight he once had with Ron Hextall.

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

[nugentmania]

While I agree with you on most things Leafs-related, this isn't one of them. For the sake of full-disclosure, I'm a Habs fan...but a Habs fan who said late on July 1st that Montreal won't make the playoffs. As for Toronto, this team is actually as bad as they seem. I concur that brutal goaltending has magnified the situation, but as a collective this team is the the most shallow group of forwards of all 30 clubs, but I'll accept the Islanders as the exception. They don't have a single, identifiable player who is a legit #1 line forward, save for Phil Kessel who has yet to suit up. Stajan, who Burke said was a top 6 guy, has already been benched. The stats tell me Ponikarovsky has 3 goals and is a Plus 5, but this shocks me because he's been nearly invisible. As for the "bottom six", it's just as bad. A couple of goons who fight...other goons? At least the Habs have young guys like Lapierre and D'Agostini, players who legs are still moving in the 3rd period. The Leafs supposedly "top 5 in the league" defense? It's been constructed piece by piece, but not as a group. When you declare Schenn as in your top 4, that's just bad coaching. Burke just wanted more toughness, not 3 pairs of guys who compliment each other. As ill-advised as the Jeff Finger signing was by Fletcher, he brings more than Schenn right now. This team, as constructed, is as bad as it seems. Send Stalberg and Schenn to the Marlies, where they'll contribute and develop as winners. This is going to keep getting ugly.

[Buck16]

I was so mad when they reduced Felix Potvin's career to one fight with Ron Hextall. C'mon, the guy's glove hand is what should be remembered. And for catching the puck, not punching.

Another joke of a celebration from the Leafs. Yet I still tune in every Saturday night ... ugh.

[sardonic1]

Of course the Laffs aren't as bad as their record shows. No team in today's parity-driven NHL is a complete step below the rest of the competition. However, the Leaf roster is packed with forwards who would be 2nd or 3rd liners anywhere else. Turning this around, even temporarily, will have more to do with the law of averages, i.e. they can't just lose all the time regardless of how bad they appear to be. Some nights, they'll win a game after being badly outplayed, or they'll get a few good bounces here and there. From there they may go on a modest winning streak, but they still won't make the playoffs with this group.

[Belligerent Burkie]

On Schenn:

The benefits of sending (or not keeping him up last year)Schenn to the juniors/minors to dominate for a year. Ok, possibly a valid point. But let's think about it. One of point that you frequently makes Damien is that Schenn lacks offence, and that going back to junior would have made him into a much better offensive contributor. According to Hockey's Futures (a source that I personally trust for developing players, but can't confirm its accuracy) Schenn "has the potential to become a shut down defender at the NHL level." And they also say (in reference to his last year of junior) "Schenn certainly has not allowed his international duties slow down his play for the Kelowna Rockets, improving upon his points per game average while chipping in a surprising seven goals, although he will never be known as a scoring machine." Now let's say for the sake of argument that keeping Schenn in the NHL last year will hurt his future offensive contributions, but he does become a shutdown guy - wouldn't you want Robyn Regehr on your team? I'd take Robyn Regehr any day of the week. And his career high for goals is 6 (which is actually inflated because it was the first year out of the lockout, and everybody and their grandma was scoring 10+ goals). That doesn't seem like a bad trade-off if it means Schenn will become a better defender with more years of experience playing against NHL players.

I'd also like to point out that Schenn did dominate at the Junior level. He wasn't exactly a player drafted because he could be great with more work, he was nearly there (in terms of development at the junior level), as evidenced by his physical dominance of the WHL, and the fact that on most nights, he was an NHL defenceman playing in the WHL (much like Doughty was in the OHL). 2 years ago in the World Juniors, he was paired with Thomas Hickey as the #1 shut-down pair. And facing the best U-20 players in the world (like Nikita Filatov), he managed to post a +5 en route to winning gold. Not too shabby, eh?

Is it just me, or do you sound like Harold Ballard if he were a journalist Damien? Why is your main concern money; regardless of what actually turns out to be the best way to cultivate talent. Who cares if they become UFA's at age 25? In most cases (for 1st rounder’s that is), they sign long term contracts that take them to about the age of 30 (see Crosby, Ovechkin, Malkin, Richards, Di Pietro, Vanek, Staal, etc...). So what's the difference in starting a guy at 18, 19 or 20 (contract wise), if you're still gonna sing them to long term deals that take them past their first year or two of unrestricted free-agency?

On Duchene:

Did he have anything to prove at the Junior level? Not really. Can he play at the NHL level? Clearly. So why on Earth would you keep him down? Are you the only person on this planet that doesn't know that the NHL is a young man’s game now? Look at all the best players and how young they are, whether it be the great players like Ovechkin and Crosby, or the really good players like Toews and Kane. There are few players now who are 33+ and still dominante (Lidstrom comes to mind). Now, careers are ending earlier because of the changes to the style of play, and most older players can't keep up. Look how many great players retired within the first year after the NHL lockout.

You also ask how putting guys like Duchene and Schenn in the league so early helps teams rebuild. Really? Aren't rebuilding teams supposed to be young? Weren't the Kings a rebuilding team the last few years? Weren't Dustin Brown, Anze Kopitar, Jack Johnson and Drew Doughty young players? I guess that putting all of those young players into the NHL early completely screwed them for the next decade or so. The Kings would be lucky to ever start a season 6-4-0 and have guys like Kopitar scoring 8 goals in the first 10 games. But thanks to putting young guys in the NHL too soon, that won't ever happen with this group of players, will it?

On MLSE, and money:

Apparently, we have all been tricked somewhere along the line into believing that playoff revenue exists, when in fact all the money goes towards the NHL, and in turn gives it to Nashville, Phoenix and maybe Florida. But thanks to Damien, we're all clear. Well, maybe not.

First point:

If the Leafs make it to the Stanley Cup Finals (win or lose, but they make more for winning) (or even the playoffs), they will earn a ridiculous amount of extra cash, on top of the ridiculous amount of cash they get anyways. I saw an interview with Richard Peddie on The Score with Gerry Dee, and one point Peddie made was that the Ontario Teachers’ Pension Plan earns money from the Leafs, but money isn't their main objective. Since holding the Leafs is an investment, growth is what they're really after. If they make 10 million dollars (for arguments sake) for 10 straight years, it's not the same for them as making 5 mil one year, 6 the next, then 7 and 8 and 9 and 11 and 12 and 13 and 14 and finally 15 million dollars (I left out 10 mil for a reason, do the math, it adds up). In both cases, they have made 100 million over 10 years, but the growth of the franchise improves its value, and if the right deal comes along, the OTPP will be more than willing to deal. The OTPP owns about 2/3 of the shares in MLSE, making them the people with the most to gain from a successful team. The next business that I see to be unequivocally happy to maintain a 0% growth rate will be the first. Especially when it's a pension plan as big as the OTPP with as many people to serve as they do. The more money the better.

Second point:

Leafs TV. If the team sucks, fewer and fewer people will be willing to pay for that service, and will be content to watch the game only when it's on CBC, SportsNet or TSN. They may head out to a bar to watch a game on Leafs TV, but they won't pay for it. So clearly it's in the Leafs best interest to ice a competitive team, like the ones during Pat Quinn's time. For comparisons sake, let's take the YES Network (the Yankees own TV network). According to an ESPN article from August 2007, the YES Network "could be worth $3 billion or more". I'll let you take a second to read that over again. All good? You read that correctly, $3 BILLION!!!!! Are you telling me that MLSE and the OTPP wouldn't want 1 penny of that revenue? The Yankees have missed the playoffs once since the early 90's. So clearly success gets you more money (makes too much sense doesn't it Damien?). You still want to try and convince me that making the playoffs doesn't matter to the OTPP?

Third point:

This is taken from Down Goes Brown, but I feel it needs to be said again. MLSE forecasts that by 2011, ticket sales will account for around 30% of total revenue (this was taken from an article by the Toronto Star). Leaving 70% to be made elsewhere (Leafs TV, jersey sales, corporate sponsorships, etc...). So if the Leafs are forecasting that tickets won't be more than a 3rd of revenues, then in order to not fall flat on their face and have a negative growth rate (which the OTPP doesn't want, for those non-business people out there), they should probably ice a competitive team. Otherwise people won't subscribe to Leafs TV (and therefore won't ever be worth the $3 Billion that YES Network is worth), will consume fewer jerseys and memorabilia, and possibly even vacate the arena (there's only so much some people can take, I myself won't abandon them and then show up when they're good like some Pittsburgh band-wagoner).

Well, I'm exhausted. Any questions Damien?

And I suggest that you attend an NHL game at some point soon, not as a journalist but as a fan. Obviously it will have to be on a night when Toronto isn't playing (you're paid to cover them). But if you attend as a fan, you'll see why your ticket theory holds no water. Sure, in the 1980's it was the main revenue stream, but now (as stated earlier) the ticket revenue won't even be 1/3 of MLSEs total revenue from the Toronto Maple Leafs. When it comes to Leafs TV, the amount of people that will watch it is only limited by the number of homes that could access it (which is exponentionally greater than the 19,000 or so fans that pack the ACC every night). And with that function, you'll notice that MLSE could make way more money from Leafs TV than they could ever hope to make from ticket revenue.

[Bryon]

Agree totally about the pre-season stuff. For as much as every coach/GM says that no job is guaranteed and everyone has to play hard in the pre-season, we know that's not accurate. There are a dozen or more guys on every team who absolutely know they will make the opening day rosters, so they simply don't have to play all that hard during the exhibition season. Meanwhile, the young players trying to make the team approach each game like it's game 7 of the Stanley Cup Finals. Combine those two factors with the fact that exhibition teams are heavily stacked with non-roster players, and you suddenly have an explanation of why guys like Kadri & Stalberg can look amazing in the pre-season.

One of my biggest pet peeves is how fans will then latch onto those pre-season performances. If the Leafs continue their woeful ways, Burke will be hearing all winter long about the huge mistake he made by not keeping Kadri up.

With only a few exceptions, it is always the right decision to send an 18 year old player back to junior where they can thrive on 20+ minutes a night, get valuable leadership & (hopefully) playoff experience, and get a bit more confidence from being a star player.

[Robert Bates]

Leafs are a train wreck of an organization. Now they have
given away the future as well. I predict the fans will be
screaming to unload that " genuis"Burke long before his 5 years runs out. Look at every one of his additions to this team and the brutal way they are playing this year.Surely the leafs can come up with a better GM/coach combination then the current bozos.