Marlies Charge Ahead

ABBOTSFORD, B.C.--Don Cherry has singlehandedly made Nazem Kadri into North America's most famous minor pro hockey player by using his Coach's Corner platform to rail against Maple Leaf GM Brian Burke on almost a weekly basis for refusing to make Kadri a full-time NHLer.

There are pluses and minuses to such notoriety. On Saturday night, it meant that with the home town Abbotsford Heat offering the home fans little to cheer about in a half-empty, half-interested arena, those in attendance may not have been familiar with every enemy skater but they sure knew to boo Kadri every time he touched the puck.

"I don't know what I did to them," smiled Kadri afterwards. "It's not the first time it has happened in an away rink. I think it's a good thing." 

RELATED

MARLIES BEAT THE HEAT 4-1

DIFFERENCES BETWEEN STANLEY AND CALDER

Even more of a probable motivation for Kadri was to respond to the good-natured ribbing he'd taken from Marlies teammate Colton Orr earlier in the day after choosing not to go on the ice for an optional morning skate after not being on the ice the day before as the club travelled to British Columbia for Game 3 of their AHL best-of-seven series against the Heat.

"You better be good tonight," chided Orr, currently ineligible to play in the AHL playoffs because of roster limits but a strong veteran presence in the dressing room for head coach Dallas Eakins anyway.

Kadri sure was good. More important, he was very good very early, scoring just 58 seconds into the game on a lightning-fast wraparound past Abbotsford goalie Leland Irving, a quick start the Marlies rode to a solid 4-1 triumph and a two games to one lead in the series over the Calgary Flames minor-league affiliate.

"That was huge," said Kadri about his goal. "The last two games they got the first goal and we were kind of on our heels a little bit. We talked today about having a good start and getting that first goal. Once we did, you could see them tighten up a little bit.

"We just took off from there."

The 21-year-old Kadri is the most dynamic offensive player in this series, and alongside Matt Frattin and Jerry D'Amigo, he has centred the most dangerous line in the series. After dropping the opener, the red-hot Marlies have used that unit effectively to help win the past two games and move to 5-1 in the post-season, and in so doing have assured themselves of at least one more home game this spring, either in this round or the next.

Games 4 and 5 are in Abbotsford on Tuesday and Wednesday, with Game 6 back in Toronto, assuming the Heat get at least one home win in this 2-3-2 series format. The winner of the series will play the survivor of the San Antonio-Oklahoma City series in the Western Conference final.

Frattin, Marcel Mueller and Phillipe Dupuis also scored for the Marlies. Nicolas Deschamps, picked up during the season from the Anaheim organization for Luca Caputi, had three assists and was plus-3, while netminder Ben Scrivens stopped 20 shots for the win. The Marlies have scored nine goals in two games against a defensively stout Heat squad that had won 11 straight before losing Game 2 in this series.

"The early goals really helps to draw them out of their defensive system and forces them to play a way they're not comfortable," said Eakins. "Both teams were a bit tired after all the travel on Friday. We made mistakes that were driving us coaches crazy, but so were they."

Kadri had a goal and two assists in that Game 2 triumph and continues to produce in the AHL post-season, another level in his progression to the NHL.

"I want to be one of those players who steps up when the team needs me to step up," said Kadri. "I'm playing with some great players. It's like they can't guard all of us all the time. 

At one point, Kadri was on the ice with D'Amigo and Frattin, while Jake Gardiner and Jesse Blacker were on the back end, a fivesome that just might be on the ice with the Leafs as a group in the near future.

"It's very interesting," smiled Kadri, who has six points in the Marlies six playoff games. "But at the same time, when we're on the ice together, we're not thinking about that kind of stuff. I know the Leafs didn't get the results they wanted this season, but I think the future is definitely bright."

Kadri admits he gets a kick out of Cherry's spirited pokes at Leaf management on his behalf.

"Really, it's nice to have him have my back a little bit," said Kadri, who played for Cherry in the CHL Top Prospects game in his draft year. "There were times I was a little down on myself and I was wondering why I was wasn't getting those minutes in the NHL. Having him think so highly of me made me want to push myself even harder. Just to make what he's saying make sense."

Abbotsford changed goaltenders for the game after Danny Taylor played well in the series opener but was shaky in Game 2. Irving wasn't much better in Game 3 while facing only 26 shots, while the decision to insert winger Akim Aliu in place of enforcer Pierre-Luc Letourneau Leblond didn't pay dividends either.

Abbotsford's top forward, Krys Kolanos, has gone silent since ripping up the first round with four goals and four assista in a three-game sweep over the Milwaukee Admirals. He has only one assist in three games against the Marlies, with Eakins deploying the defensive pairing of Korbinian Holzer and trade deadline acquisition Mark Fraser against Kolanos as often as possible.

The only discouraged Marlie might have been forward Greg Scott, a native of Victoria, B.C. who had his mother and grandmother in attendance but was miffed at himself after missing a second period breakaway while the Marlies were shorthanded.

"How many of those have I missed?" said the good-natured Scott in mock exasperation as he hustled off to visit with his relatives.

 

 

 

 

No More Whining

So the big mean bogeyman is gone.

No more nasty old trade deadline talk to have the Maple Leafs cowering under their beds. As it turned out, only Keith Aulie had anything to fear, and that outcome has him calling Tampa home today. Not so bad, right?

Even if you buy the iffy proposition that the deadline has this great impact on the Leafs that it doesn't have on teams in other intense hockey markets, it matters not any longer because the time for trading has past.

The season didn't end on Monday at 3 p.m.

The time for showing us what you've got is upon us.

Twenty games for the Leafs to prove whether they're good enough to play in the second season for the first time since 2004. Very doable if they get back to playing hockey, if they begin to again resemble that team that walked into Ottawa a few weeks back and hammered the hometown Senators.

Remember that team?

Time for Phil Kessel and Joffrey Lupul to prove their seasons weren't flukes, for Dion Phaneuf to find some consistency, for Mikhael Grabovski to demonstrate he's worthy of a big new contract and for Luke Schenn to put it all behind him and show his pedigree.

What the Leafs as a group, from coaches to players, do have to fear is the consequences should their play of the past few weeks continue. 

Its up to them to write the script. Ron Wilson can blame the media, the deadline, fatigue or bad oysters, whatever he wants, but the proof will be in the results.

If he can't coach this team into the post-season, he needs to be replaced. Pure and simple.

Ditto for the players. Time to stand and deliver.

No more whining or excuses. In the end, you will be what your record says you are.

The Big Disconnect

 

This thing is now a lot bigger than Jonas Gustavsson's gigantic error Tuesday night in overtime, or his future as a Maple Leaf.

That's because the Leafs are now in the midst of a full-blown goalie crisis that isn't likely to blow over by Monday's trade deadline if nothing is done.

While Leaf management continues to kick the tires on Rick Nash - and continues to be stunned by the demands of the Blue Jackets, which are believed to start with Jake Gardiner plus at least two of the team's best Marlie prospects - the Leafs are also now officially scouring the goalie market looking at all options that may be available. That, of course, might mean that assets used to pitch for Nash might be needed to buy a netminder.

Really, the club has only two choices.

Hand the crease to James Reimer and hope he can recalibrate, regain his confidence and summon the beast that was so good down the stretch last year, albeit in games that weren't pressure-packed like they are now.

Or get somebody else as a short-term solution to stop the bleeding. Nikolai Khabibulin, Evgeni Nabokov, whoever. Khabibulin has another year left at $3.75 million, a paycheque the Leafs would find unappealing but may have to look at. There's no interest in Marty Turco, currently blocking shots in Europe. L.A.'s Jonathan Bernier is as much an unknown as an NHL starter as the Leaf goaies. Josh Harding in Minnesota is a possible option, but he's never been a starter. No chance that if the Sabres decide to trade Ryan Miller either now or later it will be to a divisional rival. Jaroslav Halak has been a starter, but he has two years left at $3.75 million and it seems unlikely St. Louis would let him go with that team gearing up for a possible spring run.

What about the Marlies? Interestingly, that's a very good defensive team being coached by Dallas Eakins with 133 goals allowed in 54 games. Only one AHL team has allowed fewer.

But the Marlie goalies haven't been anything better than good. Ben Scrivens has been up and down ever since returning from the Leafs, Mark Owuya is just a raw rookie and Jussi (The Bus) Rynnas is currently trying to get his game together with the ECHL Reading Royals.

So no answers at Ricoh.

While the goalie question burns, there's a sense the Leafs have not quite ruled out being a bidder for Nash, but almost. Talks with Columbus haven't progressed at all, and reports around the league suggest Blue Jackets GM Scott Howson is telling teams he can just wait until June to make a deal and doesn't have to move now. 

Indeed, it seems unlikely any team will be willing to pay the cost that Howson is demanding, making it more and more likely Nash will stay put beyond the deadline.

As far as the Leaf goalies, meanwhile, many fingers are being pointed at goaltending coach Francois Allaire, who won a Stanley Cup with Burke and J.S. Giguere in Anaheim, but who has no shortage of critics, most of who criticize his "cookie cutter" approach to goaltending.

To be fair, nobody was criticizing Allaire when Reimer was playing splendidly last season, and certainly Allaire didn't instruct Gustavsson to leave his net and redirect a puck going wide in for the winning New Jersey goal on Tuesday. 

The Allaire approach is less about athleticism and more about percentages, but some criticize it as too rigid. The goalie guru held a rare media conference on Wednesday to try and explain what has happened to the team's netminding.

Allaire's system might work more effectively in Toronto if married with a more defensive team approach. Instead, Wilson is preaching a go-go, run-and-gun style, exposing two inexperienced goalies struggling to master a technique ill-fitted for the type of shots they're facing. Plus, it's all happening in Toronto where the glare of scrutiny can be harsh indeed.

You're not going to get the goalies to change styles, at least not this season. You could play a tighter style, but Wilson and Burke have shown no interest in doing that, although Burke's Cup ring from Anaheim came from a hardnosed, defence-first approach that hasn't been transferred to Toronto.

So the problem isn't just the two goalies, or Allaire, or the team's style of hockey.

Its all of them. Its not a formula for success. Problem is, Burke has married himself to Allaire and Wilson, and even if he wanted to change his goalies now, he may not be able to with the trade deadline on Monday.

 

Friday Mail Bag

This has been one of those weeks when it seems folks have been a little too eager to take speculation as fact.

For example, when it was clear Anaheim had, albeit temporarily, put winger Bobby Ryan on the trading block, I suggested the Leafs needed to seriously investigate the possibility of acquiring him even though he wasn't the centre they covet. I'm pretty convinced they did knowing the price would be very high and he wasn't exactly what they're looking for, which is a big centre.

Nowhere was it suggested that the Leafs should gut their inventory of young players to get Ryan, or even that he would be a must-buy. But some interpreted it that way.

Same with the availability of Randy Carlyle. I didn't advocate the dismissal of Ron Wilson. In fact, I never have, although I've frequently wondered about the shortcomings of Leaf teams under Wilson's guidance and how long he could retain his position if the team didn't win.

On the other hand, Carlyle and Brian Burke won a Cup together in Anaheim; it just makes sense that if circumstances presented themselves for the two men to work together again, they'd want to. But those circumstances, with the Leafs doing rather well, haven't presented themselves. That said, as long as Wilson doesn't have a contract beyond the end of this season, his future is going to be a debating point.

Last week it was chatter about Wayne Gretzky being approached to be part of a group vying to purchase MLSE. That's all the story said, but then it was blown into a suggestion that Gretzky was already part of a group or even more than that.

As it stands, none of Gretzky, Ryan or Carlyle are part of the Leafs or are expected to be in the immediate future. But it's all grist for the mill.

Now on to this week's mail bag:

Q: I don't see how Randy Carlyle would offer "a change of direction." He and Wilson are actually very similar as coaches, which is probably why Burke likes both of them.

Geoff Read

A: I'm assuming that's a statement, not a question. So I guess I accept your statement, but disagree. Wilson has had good defensive teams in his career, but Carlyle is much more of a conservative type, in my opinion. He places a greater emphasis on muscle, while Wilson preaches an attack style that can leave a team exposed. He gave a long soliloquy at the Vancouver Olympics on how both the U.S. and Canada showed the right way to play the game, up tempo and moving forward. So while I guess you could argue that most NHL coaches are generally alike in terms of strategy and systems and differ mostly on the basis of personality, I see Carlyle and Wilson as very different.

Q: Why not bring Randy in as a special assistant to Ron Wilson for now. They can have 10 general managers but only one coach and three assistant coaches? Maybe they should just hire one coach per player ??!!??

Uncle Jake

A: I'm not sure whether you're being facetious on not. But bringing in Carlyle to look over Wilson's shoulder is neither sensible nor good hockey politics.

Q: Mr. Cox, another great article. I'm sure your inbox is being riddled with trade proposals for Ryan as we speak. I have more of a comment rather than a question but would appreciate your opinion. Would Ryan look good in a Leafs uniform? Of course he would, but so would Sidney Crosby or Steven Stamkos.  But it doesn't mean we're going to get them.

Ryan of course is not at their elite level but he's an excellent player, who's asking price would be way too high for the Leafs. Do we have the players and pieces to make this type of trade? For the first time in a very long time we do have those pieces.

Which leads to my second point, for the first time in a long time we have those pieces, so why trade them! Any deal would start with Schenn or Kadri plus a significant piece in the Leaf roster already (Kulemin, Grabovski).

I would even argue that despite an offer of Schenn and Grabovski, a first-round pick would most likely have to be offered for Murray to consider a trade. In my opinion, Bob Murray is looking at how the Lupul and Gardiner trade worked out, and will literally demand an arm and a leg for Ryan from Burke and Co. Not worth it. Patience and letting the young core develop should be the Leafs' mantra. This is not a team on the cusp of winning a cup, and acquiring Ryan is that type of move.

Even though their a division rival, let the Bruins make a run and get him. If the asking price, as stated by Mr. MacLean, would be Krejci and Dougie Hamilton that's great news for the Leafs. Bruins lose a potential successor to Chara, and trade away a bona fide playoff performer who would've been the Conn Smythe winner if it wasn't for Thomas. Yeah Ryan would be a great addition, but those losses would hurt them more in the long-run than the addition of Ryan. Would appreciate your view. Cheers.

Dilraj S. Sandhu, Mississauga

A: Well, again I'm not exactly sure what the question is. I'm assuming you want me to agree or disagree with your thesis.

Basically, I disagree, but would stop short of advocating that the Leafs go full out to acquire Ryan (who's off the trade market now anyways). But we're talking a 24-year-old forward here who is under contract for another three years. I agree Anaheim would demand a stiff price, but that doesn't mean the Leafs or anyone else has to pay it. I think he's a good to very good player, not an excellent one, not a franchise-type player. So if there was a deal there in which the Leafs could acquire Ryan for one primary asset (Schenn) and one secondary asset (Jerry D'Amigo, Stuart Percy, Ben Scrivens or Jesse Blacker) I think you would look at it seriously. But that doesn't mean Anaheim would be satisfied.

Q: Should we be going after a top-line centre instead of a winger? We need a centre more now more than ever if we want to make a serious statement about a playoff run.

Russ Robinson, Toronto

A: Well, basically, the answer is yes. But it was Ryan who was (briefly) available and not a top centre. So you evaluate that opportunity, and in general, I would argue the Leafs are still in the position of trying to add as much talent as possible regardless of position, and then use their assets later to address positional imbalances. In my mind, this is a team that could still use another top six forward, particularly one with size. Ideally, that would be a centre, but ideal circumstances are rarely at hand.

Q: Hey Mr. Cox,

I attended the Marlies absolute thrashing of the IceCaps last Saturday night. Got some good natured abuse for the sweater I was wearing. Both local media and Toronto papers described Kadri as "the best player by far on the ice" and his five points in the two games seemed to prove that. However (and please let me qualify that I am not a hockey genius) it seemed to me and some other Marlies fans that he was a selfish puck hog that didn't pass to his linemates and made huge numbers of fancy plays that went nowhere. What's your impression of Kadri and is that why he's still on the farm?

Lastly, Jeff Finger played over 35 minutes and was solid.  Just thought I'd throw that out to a good guy who can't be blamed for signing a big contract.

Cheers

Dean Menchions, St. John's

A: Well, Kadri was given some AHL honours this week, so he must be doing something right. I've never really seen him as a selfish player, but rather one who's good with the puck and tries to make things happen offensively. At times, particularly when in the NHL, he gets in trouble playing too complicated a game when simple often works better. He's a talented young guy still in the development stage who can use more time in the minors honing his skill. It matters more what kind of NHL player he'll be at 25 than at 21.

Re: Finger, well, good to see he's earning his paycheque. But he's not in the Leafs' plans.

Q: Just a quick Ryan question. What's his speed like? I've heard it's not super great. And is he a good dressing room guy? And why do you think Mike Zigomanis never seemed to make it as an NHL regular? Is he just one of those guys who plateaued at the AHL level?

Jim Barber, Napanee

A: I think Ryan has been an electrifying one-on-one player. I don't think his speed is an issue. Whether he's a good dressing room guy, well, I have no idea, and only the players who have played with him would know.

On Zigomanis, he's had chances in many places, and perhaps the opportunity has just never fit his abilities. But it's not as though the Leafs are the only team who don't seem him as an NHL player. There's no crime in being a very good AHL player.

Q: Hey Damien,

With all this Bobby Ryan trade chatter, isn't it amazing that Toronto is even a player, considering that only three years ago, we really had just one "asset" (Kaberle) other than picks.

While I'm sure every team would crave top-3 talent like Ryan, wouldn't it make better sense for the Leafs to go after Chris Stewart from St. Louis?

More of a power forward that we need and probably available at a less costly price compared to Ryan (especially considering Stewart's struggles under Hitchcock so far). Same age, less cap-hit, Toronto-kid, and probably a better fit on the second line. Thoughts?

Jim Treadwell, Burlington

A: Well, we can draw up all the draft scenarios we want but they won't necessarily match the players that are actually available. Toronto might want Stewart, but St. Louis just got him and the Blues obviously see the same potential you do.

In terms of assets, while Brian Burke has been criticized for expending first round picks on Phil Kessel, he's done a rock solid job of gradually building up the team's depth chart. Interestingly, few (none?) of the players he jettisoned from Toronto have done a great deal elsewhere.

Q: Re acquiring Bobby Ryan

Burke and Wilson obviously have a bias for American-born players. Maybe it is their familiarity with them via their national team connections, but it should come as no surprise that they're chasing him.

The Leaf success is bitter sweet for me. Sure, Canada is well represented with Phaneuf, Lupul, the potential of Reimer and Schenn, but it's hard for me to cheer for this team in this city.

Sure, everyone likes a winner, but it's still our game.

Rob James, Toronto

A: I couldn't care less where a player is from, and based on their histories, I don't think you can make any case at all that Burke and Ron Wilson have a preference for U.S.-born players. Burke's Anaheim team was led by Scott Niedermayer, Chris Pronger, J.S. Giguere, Ryan Getzlaf and Corey Perry, Canadians all. When Wilson was in San Jose, his best players were Joe Thornton, Patrick Marleau, Dan Boyle and young emerging talents like Ryan Clowe. Canadians all. Let's just drop this topic. It's silly.

Q: Hello Damien,

I have been reading your column at Toronto Star and your blog for a long time and been listening on your comments on the Fan590 for a long time. I respect your opinions on hockey matters and the Maple Leafs.

I just read your article on 'The Spin' whether the Leafs should trade for Bobby Ryan of Anaheim.

I wanted to ask you whether it would make more sense to try and get either Ryan Getzlaf or Corey Perry from Anaheim instead of Bobby Ryan. Would it be possible that any of these two players might be on the trade block by Anaheim? Would it be possible that Brian Burke could make a pitch for any of them? I would personally like to see Corey Perry playing for the Maple Leafs, although having Bobby Ryan is not a bad move either, provided that what goes to Anaheim is not an over payment for the player.

I thank you for taking the time to read my email and I am looking forward to your response.

Michael Maris, Toronto

A: Sure, Michael, the Leafs might prefer Getzlaf or Perry, but as of now they're not available. I mean, Perry just won the Hart Trophy, right? Perhaps they will be in the future, and in the case of Getzlaf in particular, you can be sure the Leafs would have enormous interest. Both Getzlaf and Perry are free agents after next season, and it could be that if Anaheim has trouble signing them, they could indeed become available for trade.

MLSE Off the Market and the Friday Mail Bag

As it turns out, a buyer couldn't be found for MLSE.

Not at $1.5 billion or more. Not under current economic conditions.

So the nameless, faceless, championship-less mandarins of the Ontario Teachers Pension Fund, those people who have sponsored the wholly unsuccessful current era in Toronto hockey, basketball and soccer, will keep their stake in the sports conglomerate.

And nobody applauded.

The news, and a passionate-less statement, came from the Teachers this morning. No appreciative note to fans, or promises of increased efforts to win. Nothing, other than complimenting themselves on torontomapleleafs.com as "great owners." The fund calls MLSE a "very successful investment" but promised no other comment.

These suits just don't get it. Never have.

The pension fund has made lots of money owning MLSE, but despite hiring big names like Bryan Colangelo and Brian Burke, hasn't figured out ways to move its basketball and hockey properties into the elite of either the NBA and NHL. It can develop and open a good sports bar; winning games has never been something it has done well.

With more than $100 billion in assets, MLSE is but a small part of the pension fund's holdings, and Leaf fans need to understand that. Even under MLSE, the Leafs are only a part of the puzzle. In a generation, the hockey franchise has gone from being owned by a man who's sole interest was being the proprietor of the team to being owned by a corporate entity with only a passing interest in the needs of the hockey club.

And there's no end in sight. Now on to this week's mail bag;

Q: Damien, how goes it? Wondering should the Leafs continue to play .500 hockey for the next while, as in win one, lose one, do you think they will make a trade, fire Wilson, or keep the status quo?

Terry Halloran, Boissevain, Man.

A: Plan seems to be hold with the status quo. I believe Brian Burke is kicking tires everywhere, but until James Reimer returns, holding the line seems to be the game plan. And probably the right one.

Q: One of the faults of the Brian Burke regime is its poor track record with assessing and projecting its talent.

They tend to lean towards optimism (Pegging draft picks in the Kessel trade, Bozak as a No. 1 centre).  Obviously no one could have predicted James Reimer's injury, the absolute worst case. But with a second-year goalie, how many times have we seen them take a step back or completely fall off (Steve Mason)?

As a fan I hoped Reimer could continue his quality of play, I didn’t expect him to be a whole lot better or a whole lot worse.

But as a GM, you need some contingency plans, especially when a second-year goalie is your starter.

When the contingency plan is Jonas Gustavsson, given his playing and health track record, then it seems poorly thought out. (I have to wonder how much better the Monster would be if he played a full season in the AHL before joining the Leafs? The adjustment from Swedish elite league to NHL is a big deal for a goalie)

Now With James Reimer seemingly closer to returning; what are the chances he returns to form and can finish the season playing like he did last year? I don’t seem him starting an NHL game until January. (A couple more weeks healing, then conditioning in the AHL…)

Can the Monster hold the fort for another month?

Matt Ferraro, Guelph

A: That's a long intro to a short question. Gustavsson has been somewhat better, but getting massive offensive support has been a big key to that. Ben Scrivens will be the odd man out when Reimer returns. So the evidence seems to be that Gustavsson can hold the fort, particularly as long as Phil Kessel and Joffrey Lupul remain as hot as they have been.

Q: On Wednesday, the Leafs sat in second place (in the conference). Everyone in the playoff race (8th place and up), including Washington in 8th, can catch the Leafs because they have games in hand. This just might be a "House of Cards". The Leafs will be fighting for a playoff spot until the end of the year. What da ya think?

Andy Pizans, Longford Mills

A: Sounds like your assessment is bang on. The only change to this, in my mind, would be if Reimer returns and starts playing like an all-star. Otherwise, they'll be part of a pack grinding it out, hoping to get a playoff berth, to the end.

Q: Is it possible that MLSE will never panic about the Leafs as long as they continue to sell out the seats - boxes - condos – etc., etc.?

An unhealthy balance sheet may be the only thing that actually forces the Leafs to do something radical —- i.e.: fire Wilson -- or (God forbid)fire Burke.

Pete Geraghty, Whitby

A: Well, based on the decision of the pension fund to keep the team, it looks like an unhealthy balance sheet isn't in the cards. This has been the theory about the Leafs for years, and there's no question that it means little or nothing to ownership from a financial perspective whether the hockey club finished first or last. That said, they've hired some expensive, qualified people to run the Leafs and Raptors and otherwise stood back and watched. To some, that would be ideal ownership.

Q: Hey Damien,

Love your columns and hearing your opinions on the Fan. I was wondering if you've heard anything about the status of the improvements to NHL rinks that were shown in the pre-season and R&D camp? The curved glass at the ends of benches, the goal verification line and the thinner mesh at the top of the net. The NHL was saying during the pre-season they wanted these changes for the start of the season, but I haven't heard anything about them since. Have you heard anything about the holdup?

Cheers,

Dan Thompson, Toronto

A: All logistical. I would have thought the the verification line, in particular, would have been instituted by now. But apparently there's still bugs needed to be sorted out. The hockey world awaits.

Q: Hi Damien,

Love your column. Best substance per word ratio among hockey commentators.

My question is more of a beginning of the season question, but here goes: What is with Brian Burke and "truculence"? Every year, the Leafs miss the playoffs, and every offseason, the thing Burke always thinks is missing is the ever-elusive "truculence." As if the Leafs suffer from a dearth of 3rd-line forwards and no. 4 defencemen.

If he was bringing in Corey Perrys, Ryan Getzlafs and Milan Lucics, fine, but on a team that has (1) no reliable starting or backup goaltender, (2) no No. 1 centre, and (3) only one first-line player, his obsession with role players is kind of myopic. Role players can certainly enhance a team on the cusp, but the Leafs are not on the cusp.

Richard Blanco, New York

A: Well, it's a lot easier to get role players than stars. To me, there's no question the Leafs aren't nearly as physical (or truculent) as team as they need to be, that is, if you understand physical to be the need to be an aggressive, hitting team that pushes the play and dictates the game. Boston proved last spring how having a strong, physical club can pay off. That's the kind of team Burke would like to develop. In three years on the job, it's still a work in progress.

Q: While certainly not a Wilson fan, Damien, I do not think Burke will hang the pink slip on Wilson. Because if Reimer wasn't hurt, things would be a lot different as you know. Yes, there are other team deficiencies which the coach is responsible for but had Reimer been playing all the time, his goaltending would have covered up many of those deficiencies. Plus they have a ton of injuries to boot right now. It's kind of a tough spot for Burke because he made the terrible mistake in the offseason, not getting a proper talented backup goalie in the event Reimer got hurt. Doug McLean at the start of the season said that Leafs would go a lot farther this year PROVIDED REIMER DIDN'T GET HURT. Boy was he ever right on that one.

Paul McNamara, Midland

A: I don't think anybody believed Wilson would get fired this season unless the team got off to a horrible start. The issue has been whether, and when, he'll get an extension. Look, you cannot criticize a GM who stubbornly stands by his coach. You and I may or may not think Wilson is the right man to coach the Leafs, but you have to admit it's refreshing in this day and age to see a GM not use firing the coach as the first and easiest option when things don't go well.

Can everybody in the Don Cherry spat just grow up?

Boys, boys, boys. Let’s all grow up here.

Lots of name-calling going on between Don Cherry and a group of former NHL enforcers these days, but not a whole lot being said, at least not much more than the kind of insults and taunts you might hear in a schoolyard.

Now, maybe we shouldn’t expect more. But maybe we should. See, the issues of fighting, concussions and related depression are serious, serious issues, and the way in which these folks are dealing with them is simply trivializing the problem.

Now, for starters, that’s enough with the lawsuit talk. First of all, nobody should publish stories about somebody “threatening” to sue. It’s a story when the papers are filed.

Second, nobody should be suing anybody. Cherry used his bully pulpit to, well, bully Messrs Grimson, Nilan and Thomson, who now feel aggrieved because they don’t like being called mean names. Well, guess what? So have many of us who have had our views distorted by Cherry, who is incapable engage in a constructive, intelligent debate on any subject, let alone fighting. He can show fights, repeatedly talk about how they don’t cover the points any more and wave the flag, and that’s about it.

But those of us who find ourselves the targets of his shots don’t fire back with threats of lawsuits. You fire back by continuing to point out the many holes in Cherry’s arguments, and you never let up, no matter that his main argument on most every subject is that all who disagree with him should shut up and mind their own business because they didn’t play in the AHL during the 1960s.

To be honest, I just don’t see Cherry being very influential anymore. He’s got his devoted constituency, but it’s not growing. He’s been pushing no-touch icing for a decade, for example, and has managed to achieve zero, so how influential, exactly, can he be? He is incredibly popular, which is a different thing entirely, and he knows how to generate headlines to feed his ego, commercial interests and attract viewers to his show, which is why the CBC continues to pander to him.

But he’s not changing anybody’s mind on any subject.

Of Stu Grimson, Jim Thomson and Chris Nilan, they’ve all communicated in various ways their thoughts on fighting, but they need to understand that getting involved with Cherry is just playing his game and distorting any useful message they may have on the subject. State your ideas and opinions, and don’t worry what the CBC bully has to say.

You don’t engage with him. You never hear, say, Ken Dryden mention Cherry’s views. You ignore Cherry, you let him rage against the light as his twisted vision of Canada’s great game slowly, but inexorably, fades into history.

Late Addition

The moment for which David Steckel is famous - or infamous - is really not his calling card as an NHL player.

That moment, of course, was his collision with Sidney Crosby during last year's Winter Classic that, in combination with another hit a few days later, has derailed Crosby's brilliant career for now because of concussion issues.

Some called it an intentional, dirty play by Steckel. It wasn't. Anybody who knows anything about his career understands that if anything, he has underused his 6-foot-6 frame in terms of physical play throughout his career.

So to be a bruiser is not the reason the Leafs picked up the 29-year-old centre today from New Jersey for a fourth round pick in 2012.

What Steckel can do is take draws as well as anybody in the league, a commodity the Leafs are in short supply of these days. In particular, the left-handed shooting Steckel is useful on draws while penalty killing, and we all know how that facet of the game has been a huge challenge for Ron Wilson's club. Win a few draws while shorthanded and your chances of allowing fewer powerplay goals increases.

Steckel had the best faceoff percentage in the league last year (62.3 per cent), and could be the best draw man the Leafs have had since Yanic Perreault.

"When your team gets competitive, you're looking for small pieces," said Leafs GM Brian Burke tonight. "I'm actually pretty excited about this move. He's been on our radar for 18 months and we finally got him."

Steckel's shortcoming is his skating, and he's not an offensive player, although he was during his collegiate career at Ohio State after being drafted in the first round by the L.A. Kings back in 2001.  Unable to nail down an offensive role in the NHL, he reinvented himself as a checker and faceoff specialist.

"I like guys like that," said Burke.

At $1.1 million for this season and next, Steckel is also a little expensive for what many teams want to be paying their third and fourth liners. But the Leafs needs, both up the middle and in the faceoff circle, were significant enough they were willing to pay.

With Tim Connolly ailing, Steckel's presence frees up Tyler Bozak and/or Matthew Lombardi to play higher in the lineup in the home opener on Thursday.

 

 

 

 

Live: Hockey Q&A with Damien Cox

Two Sides of Brian Burke

Impetuous? Or patient? Uber-aggressive? Or willing to let the game come to him?

Twenty-two months into his reign as boss of all that is the Maple Leaf hockey empire, it's still debatable whether Brian Burke is an executive who believes in immediate action at all times or prefers to sit back and wait.

Which probably means he's a bit of both.

His detractors, naturally, will point to the Phil Kessel trade as an example of Burke being unnecessarily aggressive in terms of trying to turn the Leafs into a competitive team. There's no shortage of critics who would have preferred a slow, gradual approach, taking high draft picks rather than grabbed a proven young goal-scorer like Kessel. It's still not exactly clear why Burke felt he had to make that move at that time, rather than waiting a year or two before the Leaf rebuild was further along.

That debate will probably be going on a decade from now.

That Burke's underrated ability to be patient has paid off multiple times in recent months, however, is less discussed. The most recent example would be his decision not to pull the trigger on a deal with Boston that would have given him a bona fide front line forward in Marc Savard.

The Leafs wouldn't have had to give up much, if anything, for Savard, and the fact he's now on the shelf indefinitely suffering from post-concussion syndrome certainly suggests there were reasons why the Bruins were looking to unload him and his contract, which has seven years left to run and more than $28 million owing.

It's a tragedy, really, that a fine player like Savard was injured so badly by a hit for which Matt Cooke received no suspension. The NHL has changed the rules, but that won't help Savard, who might have come back too early in the playoffs last spring.

The Leafs could have had him at any time during the summer, despite denials from Boston GM Peter Chiarelli that Savard was being shopped, and certainly if Burke had made the deal, there would have been no shortage of people who would have applauded him for acquiring the top six forward his team so desperately needs.

But he didn't, deciding instead to wait and see how Savard played through the pre-season. Today, he's undoubtedly thankful he didn't.

He showed that similar patience last season swinging deals for goalie J.S. Giguere and defenceman Dion Phaneuf. Giguere could have been had before Christmas, but the Ducks weren't willing to take back heavy contracts. When the deal finally happened, Anaheim accepted the contracts of both Vesa Toskala and Jason Blake, two players many believed were untradeable.

On Phaneuf, the Flames went back and forth on whether they wanted to move the backliner for weeks, months really. The Leafs were persistent and stealthy in their approach, with no internal leaks, and when the deal came down it was a surprise to the industry, both in the Leafs getting Phaneuf and for what little they had to get him.

None of these deals, of course, have completely played out yet. Phaneuf and Giguere could bomb in Toronto, and Kessel could flourish, or the other way around, or all three may pan out. Savard may return healthy soon and be back to the player he was.

But it's clear Burke has more than one way of doing business. That some see him as always unnecessarily bold verging on rash doesn't jive with the record. 

 

 

The Expected Result

Who knows? An arbitrator could, theoretically, shock the hockey world today.

But most don't expect that to happen, and instead it's likely Ilya Kovalchuk will officially become a New Jersey Devil, with his controversial 17-year, $102 million deal approved.

Arbitrator Richard Bloch has promised his ruling by 5 p.m. today, It remains curious to many NHL observers that it was the Devils and GM Lou Lamoriello that offered up the front-loaded contract, which pays out $99 million of the value over the first 12 years in a deal designed to keep the annual cap hit at a manageable $6 million.

If the deal was ruled illegal under NHL rules, the 27-year-old Kovalchuk would become an unrestricted free agent again, and it's believed the Los Angeles Kings would  be first in line to try and sign him, although Jersey could re-work the deal. Assuming Kovalchuk's contract's contract isn't struck down, the Kings may again turn their attention to Tomas Kaberle of the Maple Leafs, knowing that division rival San Jose is already bidding to acquire Kaberle before his no-trade clause kicks in again next Sunday at midnight.

Along with the Sharks, those teams still interested in Kaberle are thought to be Boston, Tampa Bay and St. Louis. If the Devils were to lose Kovalchuk they might look to make a deal for Kaberle, but few expect that to happen.

The league rejected Kovalchuk's contract as an attempt to circumvent the salary cap, which is of course exactly what it is, an effort to squeeze $65 million worth of players under a $58 million cap, basically.

Problem is, the league has approved similar contracts in the past, and the loopholes exist in the CBA that allow these kind of financial arrangements. Moreover, both Chicago and Philadelphia made it to last spring's Stanley Cup final with these kinds of contracts on their roster, which makes it seem they offer a competitive advantage to teams willing to sign them.

It's seems almost certain these long-term, front-loaded contracts won't be permissable after the current CBA expires in two years. The question now is how many teams will try to use the loophole while it exists, and whether the NHL will continue to try to fight.