The Big Free Agent The Leafs Must Chase

James Reimer has had a terrific little run. He stepped into the breach when the Leafs needed somebody - anybody - who could stop the puck with consistency, and turned the club from a team wallowing in the depths of the Eastern Conference into a squad that has at least been able to make the final weeks of the season interesting.

It's clear Reimer has a chance to be a good NHL goalie, or maybe more. 

But it's also clear, as the soft goals have accumulated in recent games, that he isn't there yet.

That's why the unrestricted free agent the Leafs must chase this summer isn't Brad Richards.

It's Ilya Bryzgalov, the outstanding netminder of the Phoenix Coyotes. Also a fellow, you may remember, who owes Brian Burke a favour.

Again, this isn't dumping on Reimer, or giving up on him. He's a kid who is still learning how to be a No. 1 netminder in the NHL. But that second goal against the Flyers last night was a killer, as was the first goal against Chicago on Saturday, and while there are any number of Leaf skaters who contributed to those defeats, you simply cannot win on a regular basis in the NHL with anything short of airtight goaltending.

The kind Bryzgalov that gives the Phoenix Coyotes. He shut out Calgary last night, his 20th shutout in four seasons with the club, and is again the top reason while the league-owned Coyotes are running so high in the Western Conference.

Reimer may develop into a top NHL goalie, but Bryzgalov already is, and just as the Leafs went out and signed Curtis Joseph as a free agent in 1998 to turn around a non-playoff team, now is the time to spend the dough on the 30-year-old Bryzgalov ($6 million per?) and give the club top-flight, reliable goaltending it desperately requires to move forward next season.

There is simply no way the Leafs can go into next fall uncertain about their goalkeeping again, unsure whether Reimer, Jonas Gustavsson, Ben Scrivens, Jussi Rynnas or some other masked man can be the team's starter.

Next season it's playoffs or bust for Burke's team, or at the very least the team must be taken seriously as a contender for a post-season berth from October on, not just with a late-season flurry. They'll need to have quality netminding in October, not February.

Bryzgalov was the backup for Burke in Anaheim when, after being unable to find a trading partner, Burke put Bryzgalov on waivers partway through the 2007-08 season in order to give him a chance to be an NHL starter. Phoenix claimed him, and from that day forward the 'Yotes were a better hockey club.

Maybe Bryzgalov will remember Burke as a man of his word and be inclined to repay the favour by signing in Toronto. He has a terrific, outgoing personality that would play brilliantly in the GTA, far better than the more reserved personas of team stalwarts like Dion Phaneuf and Phil Kessel.

There may be other UFA goalies out there in July, including Tomas Vokoun and Craig Anderson, but Bryzgalov is clearly the cream of the crop. With the Phoenix ownership situation a disaster and the future of the franchise cloudy, it seems unlikely the Coyotes would be able to tie up Bryzgalov before he gets a peek at free agency and a chance to improve on his current $4.25 million paycheque.

Sure Richards would help the team's offence and give Kessel a playmate. But Bryzgalov is a difference maker, a perfect fit for a young, developing team. Other big market teams may have interest, but the Rangers have Henrik Lundqvist, Vancouver has Roberto Luongo, Philly has no cap room, Detroit has Jimmy Howard, San Jose has committed to Antti Niemi, Montreal has Carey Price and Chicago looks set to run with Corey Crawford.

For the Leafs, Bryzgalov is what Reimer may one day become, but isn't yet. And really, may never become. You just don't know. And after years of not knowing about their goaltending, for the Leafs enough is enough.

Now go bag the elephant.

 

 

 

 

 

 

As Bad As It Gets

The perfect storm. That's about what this week has been for Gary Bettman.

The NHL's two areas of greatest vulnerability, the two issues that attract the most public scrutiny and open the league to charges of being structurally unsound and run by outlaws, have been played out in some of North America's largest media centres this week.

In one corner, you have the league-owned Phoenix Coyotes, quite possibly headed to Winnipeg because a public watchdog smells lies and deceit and law-breaking with the process being used to transfer the hockey club to a new, Chicago-based owner.

In the other, you have the violence issue, which this week was played out in an entirely different, nearly unprecendented fashion, with Montreal forward Max Pacioretty badly injured when run into a glass partition by giant Boston defenceman Zdeno Chara. Chara was penalized on the play, but not subjected to a suspension or fine. That left hockey fans in Montreal screaming bloody murder, and even had Montreal-based Air Canada complaining to the league and seemingly threatening to pull it's financial support.

While each of these situations - Phoenix and the Chara hit - can be logically argued in different ways, the overall impression for the league is instability and mayhem. The Coyotes mess has been hanging around for months and months, defying resolution, and leaving observers wondering if the league even remembers why it went down this pointless path in the first place. Now, the league looks even worse as it tries to intimidate the pro-taxpayer group called the Goldwater Institute into withdrawing its objections against putting millions more into the money pit that is the Coyotes in a deal that seems bizarre at the very least. By fighting Goldwater the NHL seems to be fighting the sheriff on behalf of the shady characters in the black hats.

With Chara, the decision not to suspend him is clearly defensible, although many disagree. Less defensible is that neither the NHL nor the NHLPA seems inclined to investigate why the dangerous area into which Pacioretty was driven is allowed to exist. But within the larger context of what has gone on this season, from Colin Campbell's email trail to Sidney Crosby's concussion to all the headshots and cheapshots and goon tactics and league-promoted fighting, for many this is a new extreme of a league that seems to want blood and more blood.

The NHL general managers will meet next week in Boca Raton, and it was at this time last year they were forced to deal with a similar storm. Phoenix was still in play, but then the hockey world was reeling over a blind side head shot by Matt Cooke on Marc Savard that may have destroyed Savard's career and forced the league to acknowledge an enormous, yawning crater in its rule book for the first time.

Yet a year later, the GMs will convene at a time when the Coyotes debacle won't go away and the violence in the league seems worse, not better.

There seems to have been a corporate decision made that keeping the Desert Dogs in place somehow is absolutely critical to the future of the league, possibly because with a new TV negotiation ongoing with U.S. networks Bettman and Co. aren't in the mood to be going to meetings armed with a map to show American executives exactly where Manitoba is. If Washington and Pittsburgh are the only franchises the league really seems interested in promoting, it's Phoenix that seems to be the third most-discussed franchise, and that's just strange.

On the violence front, the New York Islanders turned the league into a gong show several weeks ago and seem prepared to do so again if necessary. Boston and Montreal had a fight filled contest several weeks ago that the league seemed to celebrate. The league has taken a turn over the past two years, moving from considering whether fighting is worth keeping in the wake of the Don Sanderson tragedy to embracing fisticuffs and all forms of vigilante justice as part of the entertainment package it wants to sell. The players seem to be dedicated to raising the bar on violence every night, with their union still in disarry and seemingly unable to assert itself effectively on any of these important issues despite the hiring on Don Fehr. It's interesting that Mike Milbury, who once railed against the "pansification" of hockey, seems to have taken a sharp turn and now recognizes the utter nonsense that is at the heart of the NHL's goon mentality, nonsense propagated every Saturday night on Canada's national broadcaster.

If this is a perfect storm, it's important to note that Bettman has weathered such events time and time again. This won't bring him down. But it is remarkable that at a time when the other North American leagues should be attracting gobs of negative publicity over their impending labour troubles and potential stoppages in competition, it's the NHL that's getting all the bad ink and being widely described as a league in turmoil.

 

 

Chara Escapes Extra Punishment

Zdeno Chara will not face a suspension for his controversial hit on Max Pacioretty of the Canadiens.

"After a thorough review of the video I can find no basis to impose supplement discipline," wrote NHL senior vice president of hockey operations Mike Murphy today. "This hit resulted from a play that evolved and then happened very quickly - with both players skating in the same direction and with Chara attempting to angle his opponent into the boards. I could not find any evidence to suggest that, beyond this being a correct call for interference, that Chara targeted the head of his opponent, left his feet or delivered the check in any other manner that could be deemed to be dangerous."

Pacioretty has been diagnosed with a severe concussion and a fractured vertebrae in his neck. He is still in hospital. The hit happened with 16 seconds left in the second period Tuesday night. Chara ran Pacioretty into the partition separating the two player benches and was assessed an interference major and game misconduct.

"This was a hockey play that resulted in an injury because of the player colliding with the stanchion and then then ice surface," wrote Murphy.

 

They Never Get Easier

Boston Bruins defenceman Zdeno Chara (33) hits Montreal Canadiens left wing Max Pacioretty (67) into the boards during the second period of NHL hockey play in Montreal, March 8, 2011. (REUTERS/Shaun Best)

Colin Campbell may be just as happy he has to sit this one out.

And no matter what Mike Murphy decides, at least it will demonstrate that whoever makes disciplinary decisions in the NHL, it's always going to leave some unhappy and others shaking their heads at what they perceive to be the NHL's wonky justice system.

Campbell, of course, can't be the one to rule on Tuesday night's incident in Montreal involving Boston defenceman Zdeno Chara because his son, Gregory, plays for the Bruins, and so Campbell will, as always, recuse himself from the matter.

It will thus fall to Murphy, Campbell's top assistant, and he'll hold a hearing with Chara at noon today. While some will no doubt see this as an open-and-shut case of Chara committing overt assault on Montreal forward Max Pacioretty, who was hospitalized as a result, it's a wee bit more complicated than that.

Really, the guilty party may be the rink as much as the 6-foot-9 Chara.

Here's what happened with 16 seconds left in the second period and the Canadiens leading the Bruins 4-0. Chara and Pacioretty both went hard after a loose puck just inside the right point in the Montreal end, and the Montreal player managed to chip the puck out towards centre ice.

The momentum of the players carried them towards the Boston bench, and towards the always-dangerous partition that separates the benches in the Montreal area. Chara clearly tried to squeeze Pacioretty into the boards even though the Habs forward didn't have the puck, but there was no elbow or contact to the head, and seemingly no malicious intent.

Maybe Chara should have known the partition was in play. But there certainly did not appear to be any effort by the massive Boston blueliner to injure Pacioretty, but rather just eliminate him from the play to avoid giving him access to the loose puck. Pacioretty, however, caught the partition with his head and neck area, and was twisted in ugly fashion to the ice, where he lay until doctors and medical staff arrived on the scene. Minutes later, he was taken off on a stretcher, with his head/neck stabilized.

Chara received an interference major and game misconduct, and to be sure, he definitely interfered with Pacioretty. But at the same time, if the collision had happened on the side of the rink without the benches, it would have just been a garden variety rub-out into the glass, and maybe even an infraction the officials ignore.

For years, many have worried about the way in which the partition between benches in NHL rinks and in other leagues is positioned and padded. At a time when the league and players union are considering all safety related issues coincidentally Campbell and the NHL operations staff met in New York for the first time Tuesday afternoon with newly hired NHLPA official Mathieu Schneider - this could certainly be added to the list. NHL general managers will meet Monday in Florida, and you can bet this incident will be added to a long agenda.

Montreal fans will be screaming for Chara's scalp on this one, and the messy, violent games between the two clubs this season have heated up the rivalry between the two clubs. The Bruins, who have seen their players, notably Patrice Bergeron and Marc Savard, severely injured by illegal or quasi-legal hits in recent seasons, will argue that Chara cannot be held accountable for which part of the rink a collision takes part in.

This incident will also involve another ongoing debate in NHL circles relating to the head shot problem, and that's whether a player delivering a hit carries all the responsibility for the effect of a hit, or whether the player absorbing the hit has to carry some responsibiity if he is injured for putting himself in a vulnerable position.

So is Chara to blame for running Pacioretty into the partition? There is no specific penalty for that offence, and the hit was not from behind. Then again, it's roughly akin to running an opponent into a goalpost and injuring him, which would definitely be suspendable.

Or is it up the Montreal player to be more aware? Should Pacioretty have pulled up rather than put himself at risk? There's also the suggestion of some bad blood between the two players relating to an incident at the end of a Jan. 8 game.

All is all, this is a tricky, multi-layered problem for the NHL operations department, specifically Murphy, and his decision will, you can bet, leave either the Habs or Bruins enraged.

It looked to these eyes like a fairly basic hockey play gone terribly wrong, mostly because it happened at the worst possible place on the rink possible.

The good news is that early reports suggested Pacioretty will be okay. But if Chara doesn't receive a significant suspension - and it seems unlikely he would get anything more than a couple of games, if anything at all - the health of the Montreal player won't be enough to stop Habs fans from howling.

 

 

Boston Bruins defenseman Zdeno Chara (33) hits Montreal Canadiens left wing Max Pacioretty (67) into the boards during the second period of NHL hockey play in Montreal, March 8, 2011. Pacioretty was injured on the play and was taken off the ice on a stretcher. REUTERS/Shaun Best (CANADA - Tags: SPORT ICE HOCKEY IMAGES OF THE DAY)

The Rear View Mirror

Being nearly perfect isn't now only necessary if the Maple Leafs have any hope of reaching post-season play.

It may be necessary to stop from falling down the Eastern Conference standings.

Trailing the eighth place Buffalo Sabres by five points, with a potential biggee this Saturday at home with the Sabres coming to town, the Leafs also now look over their shoulders and see the juggernaut-like New Jersey Devils coming.

Jersey trails Toronto by only three points now after being the worst team in hockey before Christmas. Can't blame the Leafs for seeing that gap close. They've gone 6-1-3 over their last 10 and have still seen the Devils gain three points on them by winning nine of 10.

Since Jan. 9, Jacques Lemaire has guided the Devils to a remarkable 20-2-2 charge, including yesterday's shootout win over the Islanders. It took Lemaire less than three weeks to get the club pointed in the right direction after taking over from John MacLean, perhaps the greatest piece of evidence backing the notion that Lemaire is a Hall of Fame coach.

It's not the same as Pittsburgh's record 17-game win streak in '93, or even the Devils 10-game win streak on the road in 2001 that tied a record. Numerically, it pales in comparison to Philly's 35-game unbeaten streak (25 wins, 10 ties) to start the 1979-80 season.

But here's why Jersey's streak deserves recognition as a remarkable accomplishment on its own. None of those teams mentioned above came from where the Devils came from this season, from the absolute depths of misery, from seeing Ilya Kovalchuk whiff on a penalty shot to Martin Brodeur go down with multiple injuries. Kovalchuk was benched for a game by MacLean, and Zach Parise was lost for the season with an injury.

The Devils lost eight of 10 to start the season and were, at one point, 18 points out of the eighth and final playoff spot. Now they are eight, which also shows you how hard it is to make up ground in the NHL these days once you fall way behind.

Over the past 24 games, the Devils have given up more than two goals just twice. Kovalchuk had eight goals when Lemaire took over Dec. 23. Now he has 24 goals, including nine goals in his last 13.

Chances are that New Jersey won't make the playoffs. They have to leapfrog four teams over the final 17 games.

But they might, and either way, this still goes down as a proud episode in a proud team's history. GM Lou Lamoriello could have pulled the plug on the season. He could have done an Edmonton or an Ottawa, gutted the team and gone for draft picks and sold it as the only way to win a championship in the post-lockout. Maybe that would have been the sensible thing to do.

But Lamoriello is all about winning. He didn't even mind being the butt of jokes for making Lemaire the Devils' version of Billy Martin, coming back for yet another tour of duty.

As it turns out, the joke is on those of use who counted the Devils - and Lamoriello - out.

 

 

 

 

 

Time for Glendale taxpayers to cut bait on the Coyotes

Sure wish Ontario had something akin to the Goldwater Institute when they were building SkyDome.

And well, of course city politicians and business types are going to squawk when a body like Goldwater sticks its nose into a smelly public transaction like the continuing rape of taxpayers in Glendale, Ariz. over the future of the Phoenix Coyotes.

The politicos and developers always want to ram things through quickly without thorough examination, and will always scream interference when somebody asks too many questions.

Then there's the scare tactics. Unable to convince anyone of the merits of their dubious plan, Glendale politicians have now conjured up figures projecting $500 million or more that the city will lose if it doesn't go through with a sweetheart plan to issue bonds and give prospective Coyotes owner Matthew Hulsizer the proceeds.

Having cost their constituents hundreds of millions of dollars already, Glendale politicians now are trying to convince the public that only spending more will fix the situation.

No, getting out now while the getting is good will do that.

The time to cut bait is now.

Naturally, the Goldwater Institute, a group formed to protect taxpayers from exactly these kinds of deals, deals that are against Arizona law, is maintaining the right to sue over this absurd proposal.

Taxpayers should applaud, and wonder why the people they elect aren't the ones protecting their interests more vigorously.

The NHL is complicit in all of this, showing no shame for its role in this ongoing disaster in the desert, and making it seem as though it is somehow protecting Glendale by keeping the franchise in place.

This was and is a bad deal, and its never going to be anything but a bad deal. Glendale needs to run, not walk, from Hulsizer and the NHL. Taxpayers there should listen to the Goldwater Institute and not the politicians who want to steal more of their money to prop up pro hockey.

Thursday Mail Bag

For Leaf fans, there are really three races to watch.

First, of course, is the club's pursuit of the Carolina Hurricanes, holders of eighth place in the Eastern Conference. Suddenly, all those emails from November claiming iron-clad mathematical projections that said the Leafs couldn't possibly make the playoffs look a little premature. That's the east. And that's sports.

Tonight, the combination of a Leaf victory in Philly against the tough Flyers and a Buffalo win over Carolina could have the Leafs within two points. Either that or a Leaf loss and a Canes win and the margin could be sixth.

The second race worth watching would be where the Leafs are in the overall standings, and thus how high the Boston Bruins will pick with this year's first round selection from the Phil Kessel trade. This morning, the Leafs are 23rd overall, tied in points with 22nd ranked St. Louis, with the Blues having played one fewer game.

All 14 non-playoff teams go into the draft lottery at the conclusion of the season, but you can only move up a maximum of four places. That's why the top five picks are somewhat erroneously called "lottery picks" because they have a shot at the first selection overall.

As of today, the highest that Boston pick could be is fourth overall, and that's if the Bruins won the lottery. The odds of that would be 3.6 per cent.

The third race, meanwhile, is where the first round picks are currently held by the Leafs after pre-deadline deals with Philly and Boston. They can't be improved by the draft lottery, and as of today they'd be the 27th and 29th picks of the first round. Given the way the Flyers and Bruins are playing they probably won't improve much, but as it stands Boston is only six points clear of 12th overall Calgary. So there is some room for improvement if the B's swoon down the stretch.

Now here's a few questions hanging around from errant mail bags:

Q: At what point do we start to evaluate Ron Wilson's effect on the team? The roster has been substantially turned over during his tenure, and the team's performance has remained unchanged. I know that the team is young, but it’s not just the level of play that has been static: players new and old continue to make the same mistakes on a regular basis. The power play has an entirely new lineup but employs the same strategy and gets the same terrible results (and ditto for the penalty kill).

Joseph Krengel, Toronto


A: Not sure when this question came in, but if Phil Kessel and Dion Phaneuf are changing the way Leaf fans think of them today, shouldn't the same be the case for Wilson? If he was to blame for the team's mid-season record, then he deserves credit for this late season push which has carried into March from February. There's a bunch of reasons for it, the play of Kessel specifically, but James Reimer is giving the Leafs their most consistent play in the crease in years. It's amazing how many coaches turn smart when they have a hot goalie, and how many look dumb when they can't find someone to stop the puck.

Q: Do you see Burke going after David Backes this off-season (assuming the Blues don't re-sign him before he becomes available)? He seems like Burkes kind of player - big, hits a lot and scores goals.

Avi Shainhouse, Boston


A: Backes was certainly a player Brian Burke targetted last summer as one that might shake free if the Blues couldn't match his asking price. Well, they did. Backes signed a five-year extension last fall worth an annual cap hit of $4.5 million.


Q: Hey Damien, do you think Kessel's hot streak at all has to do with Lupul? I know Lupul hasn't got a lot of points but ever since he arrived, Kessel's been on fire. Does he add something to the line that doesn't show on the scoresheet? Thoughts?

Nigel B, Toronto


A: You might be on to something, and clearly, it's tough for any single player to get hot without help. Lupul's been solid, more of a north-south player than Kris Versteeg more example, and the team's record since his arrival is very good. I just think Kessel is always going to be streaky, just like a lot of scorers. More than his goals and points, quite frankly, I think you're seeing a hungrier player these days, but this is the same guy who was getting eight shots a game a month ago and getting nothing out of it. That happens with scorers. Moreover, he's 23 years old. If you're the Leafs, you have to believe there's still lots of room for improvement.


Q: Hi Damien. Just curious what you see as the future of Gustavsson with the Leafs. I can't see him as the goalie of the future in Toronto with Reimer succeeding just as he has done at each level. Given Jiggy's groin issues he might be signable as back-up/mentor to Reimer for a significant cut on his current hit.

Terrence Ryan, Mount Pearl


A: This could play out a few different ways. It's hard to see Giguere returning at any price. Gustavsson hasn't been written off yet, but Reimer has zoomed to the top. One of Gustavsson, Ben Scrivens or Jussi Rynnas could, in theory, be moved in the off-season for help elsewhere. I wouldn't write off Gustavsson just yet; it could be getting a re-set in the minors is the best thing that has happened to him. Besides, you need a greater sample size from Reimer to prove he's a bona fide No. 1 netminder. This story isn't over yet. As the Leafs learned from the Pogge/Rask case, it's better to wait and be sure what you have before you trade a goalie away. San Jose could probably tell you the same thing re Miikka Kiprusoff.


Q: Do you think the Leafs should have picked up Niklas Hagman off of waivers? I don't know what's all involved in that, but, in my view, Hagman is still a sound left winger at $3 million per season (contract runs through next season). His numbers are a bit down this year, but, so what? Leafs need some help up front and they don't have to give up anybody to get him.

Rob Bartlett, Peterborough


A: I like Hagman. But he didn't make a significantly positive impact in Toronto or, specifically, on Wilson or Burke. Why bring him back?


Q: Hello Damien. What are your thoughts on the Leafs’ younger defencemen — Phaneuf, Schenn, Aulie and Gunnarson. Are they legitimate top-4 d?

James K, Toronto


A: Schenn and Phaneuf are for sure. Aulie and Gunnarson are getting the chance to prove they are. Gunnarson had 23:27 of playing time against Pittsburgh on Wednesday night, Aulie had 22:02. That's six straight games of 23 minutes or more for Gunnarson, and Aulie has played at least 19 minutes in every game since he was recalled Feb. 10. Gunnarson is more of a puck mover, and he's getting power play time now that once went to Tomas Kaberle. Aulie has fit well at times as Phaneuf's partner, but last weekend it seemed like the puck was a grenade on his stick. So really, we're just starting to find out about these guys. If I were to guess based on what I've seen, they look like the third pair on a good team. But they're getting the chance to prove they can be much more, and that, really, is the true value of giving them so much opportunity in the wake of the departures of Kaberle and Francois Beauchemin.


Q: Hey Damien. I keep hearing about how the Leafs need a centre for Kessel, yet I also hear he's near the top of the league in shots taken. How would a better centre give him more chances than what he's getting? Is the feeling that a top-drawer centre would get Kessel get more "quality" shots? I know right now he seems to take a lot of shots from odd angles, which seem like a waste of effort. Thanks.

Steve Bond, Oshawa


A: Shooters have to shoot, and you may not always like their shot choices. When it comes to finding a centre for Kessel - and it's too early to entirely rule out Tyler Bozak, although he ideally looks like a No. 3 - it's about a player who can get him the puck it prime scoring areas. In other words, its about more than the number of shots. That said, Kessel is the kind of player who not only generates his own chances, but can create for others. I think the search for a centre, specifically, is a little bit overblown. I think it's about finding him better linemates, period. And Lupul may be an example of that.