The NBA playoffs are right around the corner and the howls of complaint are being heard across North America. Teams in the West are getting screwed, the East lets in bad teams, my team deserves to be in more then Atlanta, blah blah blah. Go get yourself a hankie kid, because I don't really care. So the East is a terrible conference, big deal. Instead of concerning yourself with that you should be more worried about your team being buried by the vastly superior talent in the West then being allowed to slip into the post-season with that nonsense "cross-conference" proposal people keep running up the flagpole.
Just for the record, as of this writing three teams in the West have equal or better records then the Easts' eighth place Atlanta Hawks. The argument is that since those teams have better records they should be moved into the East for the playoffs, or take the divisional winners for both conferences and have them play against the top twelve in descending order from the remaining teams. The rational behind this is that the best teams should get in and to bad for everyone else. It sounds good, but it really isn't.
You think teams mail it in late in the season now, just wait until the numbers get crunched in January and Team A realizes that even if it plays .600 the rest of the season it'll get bumped by Team B on the other side of the country. How much do you want to see half a conference just pack it in even before the All Star break, because that's what a proposal like this would do.
Those out west couldn't care less because at the moment it wouldn't affect them, but what if this proposal actually went through? What if five years from now the West has collapsed under the weight of all it's superstars and entire teams have been ripped apart by salary cap limits and the East suddenly swoops up the ladder? I can guarantee all those Portland and Golden State fans that are whining every night on sports radio about their team getting shafted would be crying about Atlanta or Indiana taking their spot.
Look we never had this kind of cry-fest back when the NFC was winning all but one Superbowl for nearly twenty years, or when the old Campbell Conference in the NHL was winning nearly every Stanley Cup? No, because things change, and right now things are finally changing in the East.
For the better part of this decade the East has been garbage. The Detroit Pistons have been the only team to consistently put a wining team on the court while teams like New Jersey, New York, Indiana and Philadelphia have had brief runs at greatness, but never anything long term. The reason for this is simple, teams rode hot players into the ground, got some short-term profits from the post-season and did little to build on it. The 76ers are a prime example of this, having Allen Iverson do most of the work and not building a unit around him. The players they brought in were mostly old or broken down(or in the case of Chris Weber both) and the train went off the tracks shortly after their appearance in the 2001 Finals. The team stumbled along for years, refusing to try and make long term improvements and instead looking for the quick fix.
New Jersey enjoyed back-to-back Finals appearances but have since been in free-fall, Toronto built a team around Vince Carter only to have him jerk the team over while the Knicks spent money on egotistical players with more style then substance. The Heat rode a red-hot Dwayne Wade and a revitalized Shaq to a ring then went in the tank while what looked like a strong Indiana team exploded one night in Detroit and hasn't been the same since.
Oddly enough similar things were happening in the West, just not on the same scale. L.A. gave in to Kobe Bryants demands and stumbled around at .500 for several years. Portland earned the moniker the Jailblazers, nobody could quite figure out what was going with Golden State or the Clippers and the Grizzlies.....forget it. One of the primary reasons the West is so dominant right now is the simple fact that the years of cellar dwelling allowed them to build a foundation of young, top ranked players that have all begun to mature around the same time.
So can this sort of thing happen in the East? Of course it can, and it is. Look at Dwight Howard, Chris Bosh, Andre Iguodala. Slowly but steadily the young players in the East are growing up, hell even Atlanta has a nice crop of players. It's highly unlikely that we'll see 10 teams with 40 or more wins in the East next year, but it certainly isn't impossible. So where would that leave us when it came down to playoff time? A big mess that's where.
Think about it, you're in 9th in the East fighting for a spot. You're neck in neck with number 10 and just a game behind 8 with two weeks to go. You think you've got control over your playoff lives in the finals days but then somebody looks over at the West and says WHOOPSIE!! Looks like all three of you have worse records then four teams over there. Sure it might just be one win, but too bad you're out and they're in. That's it, that's your whole season. No late season push, no surge from the fans, no emotional last week. Pack your bags and go, seasons over already.
That's not a fair system. It robs both teams and fans of the excitement and emotion of a late year push and the rush of watching a hot low seed push a top ranked team in the early rounds. It takes away from the fun and sheer un-predictable rush and correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't that the whole point of the playoffs to begin with?
Saturday, April 5, 2008
Saturday, March 29, 2008
Juicing Your Ego
Well it's nice to see Jose Canseco has managed to convince another publisher to peddle his poorly ghost written drivel again. Bad enough we had to suffer through his first rag "Juiced" in which he not only ratted out former team mates but glorified the use of steroids, crediting them and growth hormones for his career, but now with his new book "Vindicated" he not only pats himself on the back but gives more names and now acts like he's trying to solve the problem.
Look I'll give Canseco some credit. Although his first book was completely self-serving and smacked more of a man trying to get back at a sport that won't give him the accolades he thinks are owed to him, it did get the ball rolling on the steroids investigations. Indeed had Caseco not taken such a selfish approach it is likely the Mitchell Report never would have even been conceived. Canseco managed to embarrass MLB into finally doing something about a problem it had been fully willing to turn a blind eye to in previous years for the sake of ratings and revenues. But that doesn't mean I'm going to congratulate Jose, or let him get away with more self-centered preening.
Like his previous book Canseco has a list of big name players he wants to expose. These are Roger Clemens, alleged blackmail victim Magglio Ordonez(more on this later) and Alex Rodriguez. He offers up a Presidential conspiracy to keep Clemens in the clear, accuses Rodriguez of trying to get with his wife and even hints at "converting" 60 Minutes' Mike Wallace to the HGH cause. And it's all true, because Caseco took not one, but TWO lie detector tests to prove it. Hey Jose, you know there's a reason polygraphs aren't admissible in a court of law right? Just checking.
What is so laughable about all this is that Canseco continues to try and put himself in the position of a tragic hero. The flawed man trying to do right by the sport that made him and woe to those who deny him his moment in the sun. Canseco admits as much himself when he rages about being left out of the George Mitchell investigation. What Canseco could have contributed I don't really know considering he's been a pariah in baseball circles for years. while his contention that Mitchells report is biased because of his affiliation with the Boston Red Sox, may I point out everyone was already saying that when it was announced Mitchell would be the one heading up the investigation?
As for the book itself, well if you like tattle tales you'll love this one. The Ordonez story has been out for a while now. Canseco says he injected Magglio with steroids like he did with MacGuire back in his Oakland days. He also touches on a report that Canseco had tried to blackmail Ordonez into investing 5 million dollars into a documentary he was making in exchange for keeping Magglios name out of the new book. Canseco denies this happened but at this point I've long given up taking players words at face value. What really happened we may never know, and honestly I don't care.
Then we come to Clemens. Now this one is interesting because because Canseco admits he has no evidence that The Rocket ever took steroids, just suspicions. He then gives us a lovely little conspiracy theory involving President Bush. Apparently Jose had wanted to include Clemens in his first book but had not been allowed to by the publishers, and comments he made about Clemens during his 60 Minutes interview and on ESPN were subsequently deleted. Jose's explanation?
"Roger Clemens was from Texas. He went to play for the Astros, to be close to his family. George W. Bush, a former owner of the Texas Rangers baseball team, is, like Clemens, a proud Texan. Clemens is a personal friend of Bush Sr. and his wife, Barbara. Clemens still has a standing invitation from Bush Jr. to visit the White House anytime. Getting the picture? Maybe the president of the United States, or his daddy, the ex-president, made some calls and took care of things for good ole Roger."
Oooookay then. I guess I should get my tinfoil hat out and stop drinking tap water while I'm at it.
Then we come to what is easily the most personal part of the book, Canseco's attack on Alex Rodriguez. Now I may have my issues with A-Rod, but I've never even suspected he was on the juice. Much like Ken Griffey Jr. Rodriguez has simply never fit the mold of a player who took steroids or HGH. He was never a marginal player who suddenly exploded with huge power numbers. His body has never gone under any drastic changes and his output has been consistent his entire career. So why would Canseco write that he introduced Rodriguez to a known steroid supplier. So why not mention him in the first book? He certainly is a much bigger target then a reired Mark MacGuire or a marginalized Sammy Sosa.
Canseco tells us he did not include Rodriguez the first time around because he thought that no one would believe him or as he put it "question his motives". Well people did that without a-Rod's name in your book Jose, so you might as well have gone in for a pound. So why now? Well it turns out Canseco has an issue with Alex. In his own words he "hated the bastard" because shortly after he allegedly introduced Rodriguez to a steroid supplier the MVP began chasing Jose's wife. Once again I'll let Canseco use his own words here.
"So A-Rod, if you're reading this book, and if I'm not getting through to you, let's get clear on one thing: I hate your f***ing guts"
Bitter much? Well they really don't come much more bitter then Canseco these days. Ignored by Cooperstown, alienated by his former team mates and coaches, berated by fans and reporters and then there's that whole home-run-off-his-head moment of glory. The man spent his entire career using illegal drugs to boost his performance, spat on the game that made him rich and famous then turned around and lashed out at the people who told him to leave the party like the drunken guest he had turned into. There are no altruistic motives behind Canseco's outing of alleged cheaters, no gallant crusade to rescue baseball. Just a bitter man's vendetta against the people who want nothing to do with him anymore.
Look I'll give Canseco some credit. Although his first book was completely self-serving and smacked more of a man trying to get back at a sport that won't give him the accolades he thinks are owed to him, it did get the ball rolling on the steroids investigations. Indeed had Caseco not taken such a selfish approach it is likely the Mitchell Report never would have even been conceived. Canseco managed to embarrass MLB into finally doing something about a problem it had been fully willing to turn a blind eye to in previous years for the sake of ratings and revenues. But that doesn't mean I'm going to congratulate Jose, or let him get away with more self-centered preening.
Like his previous book Canseco has a list of big name players he wants to expose. These are Roger Clemens, alleged blackmail victim Magglio Ordonez(more on this later) and Alex Rodriguez. He offers up a Presidential conspiracy to keep Clemens in the clear, accuses Rodriguez of trying to get with his wife and even hints at "converting" 60 Minutes' Mike Wallace to the HGH cause. And it's all true, because Caseco took not one, but TWO lie detector tests to prove it. Hey Jose, you know there's a reason polygraphs aren't admissible in a court of law right? Just checking.
What is so laughable about all this is that Canseco continues to try and put himself in the position of a tragic hero. The flawed man trying to do right by the sport that made him and woe to those who deny him his moment in the sun. Canseco admits as much himself when he rages about being left out of the George Mitchell investigation. What Canseco could have contributed I don't really know considering he's been a pariah in baseball circles for years. while his contention that Mitchells report is biased because of his affiliation with the Boston Red Sox, may I point out everyone was already saying that when it was announced Mitchell would be the one heading up the investigation?
As for the book itself, well if you like tattle tales you'll love this one. The Ordonez story has been out for a while now. Canseco says he injected Magglio with steroids like he did with MacGuire back in his Oakland days. He also touches on a report that Canseco had tried to blackmail Ordonez into investing 5 million dollars into a documentary he was making in exchange for keeping Magglios name out of the new book. Canseco denies this happened but at this point I've long given up taking players words at face value. What really happened we may never know, and honestly I don't care.
Then we come to Clemens. Now this one is interesting because because Canseco admits he has no evidence that The Rocket ever took steroids, just suspicions. He then gives us a lovely little conspiracy theory involving President Bush. Apparently Jose had wanted to include Clemens in his first book but had not been allowed to by the publishers, and comments he made about Clemens during his 60 Minutes interview and on ESPN were subsequently deleted. Jose's explanation?
"Roger Clemens was from Texas. He went to play for the Astros, to be close to his family. George W. Bush, a former owner of the Texas Rangers baseball team, is, like Clemens, a proud Texan. Clemens is a personal friend of Bush Sr. and his wife, Barbara. Clemens still has a standing invitation from Bush Jr. to visit the White House anytime. Getting the picture? Maybe the president of the United States, or his daddy, the ex-president, made some calls and took care of things for good ole Roger."
Oooookay then. I guess I should get my tinfoil hat out and stop drinking tap water while I'm at it.
Then we come to what is easily the most personal part of the book, Canseco's attack on Alex Rodriguez. Now I may have my issues with A-Rod, but I've never even suspected he was on the juice. Much like Ken Griffey Jr. Rodriguez has simply never fit the mold of a player who took steroids or HGH. He was never a marginal player who suddenly exploded with huge power numbers. His body has never gone under any drastic changes and his output has been consistent his entire career. So why would Canseco write that he introduced Rodriguez to a known steroid supplier. So why not mention him in the first book? He certainly is a much bigger target then a reired Mark MacGuire or a marginalized Sammy Sosa.
Canseco tells us he did not include Rodriguez the first time around because he thought that no one would believe him or as he put it "question his motives". Well people did that without a-Rod's name in your book Jose, so you might as well have gone in for a pound. So why now? Well it turns out Canseco has an issue with Alex. In his own words he "hated the bastard" because shortly after he allegedly introduced Rodriguez to a steroid supplier the MVP began chasing Jose's wife. Once again I'll let Canseco use his own words here.
"So A-Rod, if you're reading this book, and if I'm not getting through to you, let's get clear on one thing: I hate your f***ing guts"
Bitter much? Well they really don't come much more bitter then Canseco these days. Ignored by Cooperstown, alienated by his former team mates and coaches, berated by fans and reporters and then there's that whole home-run-off-his-head moment of glory. The man spent his entire career using illegal drugs to boost his performance, spat on the game that made him rich and famous then turned around and lashed out at the people who told him to leave the party like the drunken guest he had turned into. There are no altruistic motives behind Canseco's outing of alleged cheaters, no gallant crusade to rescue baseball. Just a bitter man's vendetta against the people who want nothing to do with him anymore.
Saturday, March 15, 2008
The Kobe Conspiracy
I'm often accused of being a Kobe hater, mostly because I keep telling people he's not the MVP, has never been an MVP and may very well never be an MVP. Kobe fans and apologists automatically assume any such position is proof that I merely hate Kobe and won't admit it. Thing is I openly admit that Kobe Bryant is a phenomenal talent and arguably the best player this decade, but that doesn't mean he's the most valuable player is the NBA. In fact, it's quite easy to make the argument that he isn't even the most valuable player on his team. Naturally such words are shouted down by Lakers fan, and Bryants lack of MVP trophy's is proof that the media is biased against him. C'mon folks, get serious.
Look there is no other player in the NBA as talented as Bryant is. At any given moment he can single handedly take over the offense and drain 12 or 20 straight points. He's hit big shots and won games late or on overtime. His ability to rack up 40 point games are the stuff of legend, as are his highlight real lay-ups and dunks. Still, no matter how many times he leads on Sportscenter the Lakers do not live and die by Kobe Bryant. Truth is the Lakers would have pulled off one of the biggest upsets in NBA history two years ago if it hadn't been for Bryant trying to do everything.
You remember it right? The Lakers getting into the playoffs by the skin of their teeth, facing the high powered Pheonix Suns in what was expected to be a four game slaughter. It didn't work out that way though as Bryant took a step back, shot less, passed more and played a hard half-court game that brought the Suns to the brink of elimination. Then Bryant decided to take the ball, shoot 25 times or more and grab the spotlight. Cue the comeback by the Suns and a Game 7 no-show by Bryant. A year later it was no different, this time Bryant didn't even bother to try and the Lakers were knocked out in five by the Suns. The evidence was clear, the Lakers couldn't win the big games playing Kobe Ball.
Jump to this year and you have a Lakers team that hit the ground running and hasn't looked back. L.A. has been steamrolling teams and are one of the best teams in the NBA. Thing is it has almost nothing to do with Bryant. His stats this year are no different from the last 5 but the team is somehow better. Gee wonder why? Could it be that it has something to do with the rest of the team? Or to be specific three other players.
The Lakers early success had a great deal more to do with the inspired play of center Andrew Bynum and forward Lamar Odom, both who were pulling down a double/double almost nightly and playing solid defense. Bynums play is the most important to note because he gave the Lakers an inside presence the haven't has since Shaq(begging the question just how much did Bryant really need O'Neal?) and was huge on the glass for a team that was getting out-rebounded constantly. Then Bynum got hurt and suddenly that low-post presence was gone. The Lakers stayed in the thick of things, but weren't really the same team. Then came the steal of the decade.
In exchange for Kwame Brown, guard Javaris Crittenton, guard Aaron McKie (who the Lakers signed earlier today), the draft rights to Marc Gasol and first round picks in 2008 and 2010 the Lakers stole Pau Gasol from the Memphis Grizzlies. Suddenly the Lakers went on yet another run, rolled up Division and Conference opponents and now find themselves tied for first overall in the West. Gasol has been a force for Los Angeles on both ends while Odom has continued his strong play. Team after team have fallen to the Lakers who now look like favorites to win the West and once again I say Bryant isn't the MVP.
You want a real MVP candidate? How about Chris Paul of New Orleans? How that squad currently has 44 wins is beyond comprehension until you watch Paul dominate an opposing team with his scoring and play making. Then there's the force of nature known as Dwight Howard who has singlehandedly turned the sad sack Magic into contenders in the East. Heck, I'd give the MVP to the entire starting five for the Houston Rockets at this point with the way that team has come together.
The MVP trophy is awarded to the player that makes the difference. That one person upon whom winning and losing rests. That's why goalies have won in in the NHL or defensive linemen have won it in the NFL. It's not the guy who scores the most or makes the most headlines, it's the person that the team can't win without. And if history has shown us anything it's that Bryant needs his team more then they need him.
Look there is no other player in the NBA as talented as Bryant is. At any given moment he can single handedly take over the offense and drain 12 or 20 straight points. He's hit big shots and won games late or on overtime. His ability to rack up 40 point games are the stuff of legend, as are his highlight real lay-ups and dunks. Still, no matter how many times he leads on Sportscenter the Lakers do not live and die by Kobe Bryant. Truth is the Lakers would have pulled off one of the biggest upsets in NBA history two years ago if it hadn't been for Bryant trying to do everything.
You remember it right? The Lakers getting into the playoffs by the skin of their teeth, facing the high powered Pheonix Suns in what was expected to be a four game slaughter. It didn't work out that way though as Bryant took a step back, shot less, passed more and played a hard half-court game that brought the Suns to the brink of elimination. Then Bryant decided to take the ball, shoot 25 times or more and grab the spotlight. Cue the comeback by the Suns and a Game 7 no-show by Bryant. A year later it was no different, this time Bryant didn't even bother to try and the Lakers were knocked out in five by the Suns. The evidence was clear, the Lakers couldn't win the big games playing Kobe Ball.
Jump to this year and you have a Lakers team that hit the ground running and hasn't looked back. L.A. has been steamrolling teams and are one of the best teams in the NBA. Thing is it has almost nothing to do with Bryant. His stats this year are no different from the last 5 but the team is somehow better. Gee wonder why? Could it be that it has something to do with the rest of the team? Or to be specific three other players.
The Lakers early success had a great deal more to do with the inspired play of center Andrew Bynum and forward Lamar Odom, both who were pulling down a double/double almost nightly and playing solid defense. Bynums play is the most important to note because he gave the Lakers an inside presence the haven't has since Shaq(begging the question just how much did Bryant really need O'Neal?) and was huge on the glass for a team that was getting out-rebounded constantly. Then Bynum got hurt and suddenly that low-post presence was gone. The Lakers stayed in the thick of things, but weren't really the same team. Then came the steal of the decade.
In exchange for Kwame Brown, guard Javaris Crittenton, guard Aaron McKie (who the Lakers signed earlier today), the draft rights to Marc Gasol and first round picks in 2008 and 2010 the Lakers stole Pau Gasol from the Memphis Grizzlies. Suddenly the Lakers went on yet another run, rolled up Division and Conference opponents and now find themselves tied for first overall in the West. Gasol has been a force for Los Angeles on both ends while Odom has continued his strong play. Team after team have fallen to the Lakers who now look like favorites to win the West and once again I say Bryant isn't the MVP.
You want a real MVP candidate? How about Chris Paul of New Orleans? How that squad currently has 44 wins is beyond comprehension until you watch Paul dominate an opposing team with his scoring and play making. Then there's the force of nature known as Dwight Howard who has singlehandedly turned the sad sack Magic into contenders in the East. Heck, I'd give the MVP to the entire starting five for the Houston Rockets at this point with the way that team has come together.
The MVP trophy is awarded to the player that makes the difference. That one person upon whom winning and losing rests. That's why goalies have won in in the NHL or defensive linemen have won it in the NFL. It's not the guy who scores the most or makes the most headlines, it's the person that the team can't win without. And if history has shown us anything it's that Bryant needs his team more then they need him.
Saturday, March 8, 2008
The Blame Game
OK, I was off for two weeks, had some family things to take care of.
Well it finally happened, John Paddock coach of the Ottawa Senators was fired. Granted it had only been a matter of time. After getting off to a blistering 15-2 start the team lost 7 in a row and proceeded to play .500 or worse from that point on. A team that had built a massive point cushion in the early weeks squandered it, playing easily their worst hockey after a huge 3-2 victory on home ice over the Detroit Red Wings. And while it still maintained one of the best offenses in the NHL, the team was porous defensively and average to terrible in goal. So it was, after back to back shutout losses to division rivals Toronto and Boston that Paddock was axed. Of course, it wasn't his fault.
No the blame for Paddocks canning was dropped right into the lap of the teams resident problem child, goaltender Ray Emery. Last years savior between the pipes has become a pariah in Ottawa and a lightning rod for controversy. Be it his encounters with local authorities while driving his giant white Hummer, flashy attire, tardiness and half-hearted approach to practice Emery shouldered most if not all the blame for the teams struggles. It was easy to do really because the teams began its downward spiral shortly after Emery's return, but that was purely coincidental.
The reality of the situation is that the team as a whole was not playing well. The red hot start had more to do with the Senators potent offense and other teams early struggles. Ottawas top line would rack up early goals and the team would then be able to take advantage of opponents being forced to open their game up to try and get some goals back. Then suddenly, something changed as other teams broke out of their early season funks and began taking it to the Senators. Teams began to aggressively forecheck Ottawa, to drive the net and physically harass the Senators top forwards. Suddenly the teams offense sputtered and the defense was ridden into the ice under a pile of opposing sweaters. Goalie Martin Gerber couldn't stop a beach ball from hitting the net. Yet somehow this was not the fault of the players on the ice, it was the fault of the 9.5 million dollar Emery.
Calls for Emery's trade or outright dismissal were long and loud on sports talk radio, television and the pages of local newspapers. After all, the team was playing fine until he had returned from off-season wrist surgery. Obviously his tardiness and lackadaisical approach to practice was distracting the team and causing all the off and on-ice issues that were dragging the team down. His fat new contract was also putting pressure on Gerber who was stumbling because of it. Suuuure, that's it. No other logical explanation. John Paddock even said as much after his dismissal, stating that his inability or unwillingness to take Emery to task had undermined his ability to coach the team.
Thing is this is nothing new with Ray Emery. Last year he took the same approach, was late for practice, didn't work hard during team skates and generally did his own thing. That seemed to be fine with everyone both on the team and in management because the Senators were winning and went to the Stanley Cup Finals. Emery had stepped in to replace a struggling Gerber early last year and had helped right the ship and was instrumental in Ottawas post-season run. Everyone had been willing to turn a blind eye to Emery's apparent insubordination so long as he kept pucks out of the net. The same did not hold true this year however, for once the team went into the tank those same actions suddenly became a liability. My question is how can the teams incredible collapse be the fault of Ray Emery?
The Senators are a team loaded with All Star talent and veteran leadership. From ten year veterans like Daniel Alfredsson, Wade Redden and Chris Phillips, flashy offensive leaders in Jason Spezza and Danny Heatley to experienced character players like Mike Fisher, Chris Neil, and Anton Volchenkov. All have been deep into the playoffs, have hundreds of games worth of NHL experience and with the exception of Heatley have played their entire careers in Ottawa. There is no way a third year player like Emery could possibly have such a destructive influence on a team like this. No the roots of Ottawas flop run much deeper then one malcontent.
You need only watch a handful of games the Senators have played in recent months to see to the real problems. Outside of the big three of Heatley, Spezza and Alfredsson almost no forwards are scoring. Mike Fisher is currently mired in a 15 game goalless streak, Antoine Vermette shows up maybe one game out of every four, Randy Robitaille is showing Ottawa fans why 29 other teams have had no interest in his services the past two years and Chris Neil has been a shadow of the player he was last year. Instead of a hard, aggressive forecheck the Senators keep trying to dangle and drag the puck into the offensive zone, looking for the perfect play rather then go for the dirty goals. Opposing defensemen simply have to poke check or otherwise shove Ottawa players slightly to knock the puck loose and turn it up ice and Ottawa defense has hardly fared much better.
Early on it looked like the top three blue liners for the Senators would be up for the Norris Trophy. The duo of Chris Phillips and Anton Volchenkov were shutting down the leagues bets forwards while putting up points and impressive +/- stats(at one point both were topping +30). Joe Corvo was an offensive wizard who was working the power play and springing forwards with stretch passes. Even much maligned Wade Redden was playing well enough to keep most people off his back. Not anymore though. Now Ottawas defense is under siege every night, with opposing forwards hitting everything in sight while Senator forwards hover around the face off circles looking for passes rather then helping out their teammates. Turn-overs and give aways
have become the norm in Ottawas end and whichever goaltender is in net is usually in for a long night. Even in games Ottawa has won they've been sloppy, allowing late goals and taking bad penalties.
Despite all this though, Ray Emery gets the blame. The big guns aren't scoring, the veteran leaders look lost and the defense has been porous most nights. There has been no cohesive offensive of defensive style of play and the team currently sits 24th in the NHL in goals allowed, most of them from turn overs or poor defensive coverage. Ottawas crease has become a parking lot for opposing forwards while defensemen pinch in constantly with little risk of giving up an odd man rush. Yeah, I can really see how this is all the fault of a guy who's only played 30 games this year.
Well it finally happened, John Paddock coach of the Ottawa Senators was fired. Granted it had only been a matter of time. After getting off to a blistering 15-2 start the team lost 7 in a row and proceeded to play .500 or worse from that point on. A team that had built a massive point cushion in the early weeks squandered it, playing easily their worst hockey after a huge 3-2 victory on home ice over the Detroit Red Wings. And while it still maintained one of the best offenses in the NHL, the team was porous defensively and average to terrible in goal. So it was, after back to back shutout losses to division rivals Toronto and Boston that Paddock was axed. Of course, it wasn't his fault.
No the blame for Paddocks canning was dropped right into the lap of the teams resident problem child, goaltender Ray Emery. Last years savior between the pipes has become a pariah in Ottawa and a lightning rod for controversy. Be it his encounters with local authorities while driving his giant white Hummer, flashy attire, tardiness and half-hearted approach to practice Emery shouldered most if not all the blame for the teams struggles. It was easy to do really because the teams began its downward spiral shortly after Emery's return, but that was purely coincidental.
The reality of the situation is that the team as a whole was not playing well. The red hot start had more to do with the Senators potent offense and other teams early struggles. Ottawas top line would rack up early goals and the team would then be able to take advantage of opponents being forced to open their game up to try and get some goals back. Then suddenly, something changed as other teams broke out of their early season funks and began taking it to the Senators. Teams began to aggressively forecheck Ottawa, to drive the net and physically harass the Senators top forwards. Suddenly the teams offense sputtered and the defense was ridden into the ice under a pile of opposing sweaters. Goalie Martin Gerber couldn't stop a beach ball from hitting the net. Yet somehow this was not the fault of the players on the ice, it was the fault of the 9.5 million dollar Emery.
Calls for Emery's trade or outright dismissal were long and loud on sports talk radio, television and the pages of local newspapers. After all, the team was playing fine until he had returned from off-season wrist surgery. Obviously his tardiness and lackadaisical approach to practice was distracting the team and causing all the off and on-ice issues that were dragging the team down. His fat new contract was also putting pressure on Gerber who was stumbling because of it. Suuuure, that's it. No other logical explanation. John Paddock even said as much after his dismissal, stating that his inability or unwillingness to take Emery to task had undermined his ability to coach the team.
Thing is this is nothing new with Ray Emery. Last year he took the same approach, was late for practice, didn't work hard during team skates and generally did his own thing. That seemed to be fine with everyone both on the team and in management because the Senators were winning and went to the Stanley Cup Finals. Emery had stepped in to replace a struggling Gerber early last year and had helped right the ship and was instrumental in Ottawas post-season run. Everyone had been willing to turn a blind eye to Emery's apparent insubordination so long as he kept pucks out of the net. The same did not hold true this year however, for once the team went into the tank those same actions suddenly became a liability. My question is how can the teams incredible collapse be the fault of Ray Emery?
The Senators are a team loaded with All Star talent and veteran leadership. From ten year veterans like Daniel Alfredsson, Wade Redden and Chris Phillips, flashy offensive leaders in Jason Spezza and Danny Heatley to experienced character players like Mike Fisher, Chris Neil, and Anton Volchenkov. All have been deep into the playoffs, have hundreds of games worth of NHL experience and with the exception of Heatley have played their entire careers in Ottawa. There is no way a third year player like Emery could possibly have such a destructive influence on a team like this. No the roots of Ottawas flop run much deeper then one malcontent.
You need only watch a handful of games the Senators have played in recent months to see to the real problems. Outside of the big three of Heatley, Spezza and Alfredsson almost no forwards are scoring. Mike Fisher is currently mired in a 15 game goalless streak, Antoine Vermette shows up maybe one game out of every four, Randy Robitaille is showing Ottawa fans why 29 other teams have had no interest in his services the past two years and Chris Neil has been a shadow of the player he was last year. Instead of a hard, aggressive forecheck the Senators keep trying to dangle and drag the puck into the offensive zone, looking for the perfect play rather then go for the dirty goals. Opposing defensemen simply have to poke check or otherwise shove Ottawa players slightly to knock the puck loose and turn it up ice and Ottawa defense has hardly fared much better.
Early on it looked like the top three blue liners for the Senators would be up for the Norris Trophy. The duo of Chris Phillips and Anton Volchenkov were shutting down the leagues bets forwards while putting up points and impressive +/- stats(at one point both were topping +30). Joe Corvo was an offensive wizard who was working the power play and springing forwards with stretch passes. Even much maligned Wade Redden was playing well enough to keep most people off his back. Not anymore though. Now Ottawas defense is under siege every night, with opposing forwards hitting everything in sight while Senator forwards hover around the face off circles looking for passes rather then helping out their teammates. Turn-overs and give aways
have become the norm in Ottawas end and whichever goaltender is in net is usually in for a long night. Even in games Ottawa has won they've been sloppy, allowing late goals and taking bad penalties.
Despite all this though, Ray Emery gets the blame. The big guns aren't scoring, the veteran leaders look lost and the defense has been porous most nights. There has been no cohesive offensive of defensive style of play and the team currently sits 24th in the NHL in goals allowed, most of them from turn overs or poor defensive coverage. Ottawas crease has become a parking lot for opposing forwards while defensemen pinch in constantly with little risk of giving up an odd man rush. Yeah, I can really see how this is all the fault of a guy who's only played 30 games this year.
Monday, February 18, 2008
A Comedy of the Absurd
Sorry for the layoff but family first as they say. Anyway, on to this weeks rant....
One of my favorite comedies is an under-rated Bill Murray film called "The Life Aquatic with Steve Zissou", mostly because it is based around some of the most absurd humor ever put on camera. This past week I've gotten to see another kind of comedy played out in Washington D.C. that makes the scripted oddities of that Wes Anderson film look like the tired pop culture jokes from the "Epic Movie/Meet the Spartans" crew. I'm of course referring to the Roger Clemens Congressional hearing and Arlen Specter's talks with NFL Commissioner Roger Goodell. The former came about as the result of one mans ego and the second because of, well, one mans ego. Both were allegedly done to clean things up in the two respective sports, but in the end it was all just a three ring circus with no ringmaster, elephants or trapeze artists, just a bunch of poorly trained clowns cavorting around and getting laughs for all the wrong reasons.
Let's start with the big headline grabber of the month, Roger Clemens going before Congress. First and foremost, that wasn't even supposed to happen. Henry Waxman even came out and said as much, stating that the person who pushed for the hearing was Roger Clemens. It was Clemens who held the big press conference where he played a secretly recorded phone conversation with his former trainer Brian McNamee. It was Clemens who forced the issue and grabbed as much spotlight time as possible. On the other side of the coin it was Congress who started having these kangaroo court hearings in the first place and Congress who split almost universally down party lines during Clemens' questioning last week.
I have to admit I was laughing nearly the whole time during Clemens' testimony. It was such a joke to watch. Prior to the televised questioning Clemens had talked to the members privately and obviously(along with his lawyers) thought he was going to get treated with kid gloves, and why not? The same members who were going to question him publicly were posing for pictures, getting autographs, glad-handing and generally mugging for the camera with their new best friend Roger Clemens. So when the Rocket had to sit down and answer some actual questions regarding the facts in the investigation he looked like the proverbial deer in the headlights, constantly looking to his lawyer for advice on how to answer.
Bu Congress wasn't done there. In order to get even more belly laughs out of the viewers at home they obviously decided going into the hearing that there would be a strict adherence to party lines, meaning the Democrats would ask the hard questions while most of the Republicans tossed Roger some nice juicy softballs or just forgo questioning at all and just kiss his (allegedly) abscessed ass. Hell, for the most part even the questions the Democrats threw weren't even close to a strike. It wasn't until the hearing was almost over that Elijah Cummings finally brought the heat and flat out asked Clemens, why would McNemee tell the truth about Pettitte and Knoblauch but lie about Clemens? If Pettitte is an honest man who openly admitted to using HGH, does that not mean that McNemee is telling the truth about Roger? The Rocket struck out looking.
To add to the already outrageous levels of humor, we also got to see folks like republican Chris Shays practically shouting at McNemee, saying "You deal drugs!" as if that somehow means he's lying under oath. I wonder if Shays has ever worked a narcotics case before. Somehow I doubt it. Shays was backed nicely by Virginia Foxx who brought props to the set in the form of posters from various times in Rogers career as being definitive proof that Clemens could not have been on performance enhancing drugs(and proof she has no freaking clue what the hell she's talking about). Someone just give these guys an Emmy already, they made Frasier look like Joey.
But we're forgetting, this was a double feature. Yes we also got to see Arlen Specter do his best song and dance for the camera about whether or not the New England Patriots secretly filmed the St. Louis Rams final walkthrough before SuperBowl 36. OK, just so we're clear here, the US Army is getting ready to shoot down a Russian satellite, the economy is tanking faster then the Kansas City Royals and the Canadian dollar is getting ready to start looking down on the greenback on a long term basis but what America needs right now is an investigation as to whether or not the Patriots cheated in a game 6 years ago?
But Specter will not be swayed. He met with NFL Commissioner Roger Goodell and has made it clear he's going to see this through. What he means to accomplish I don't honestly know. For starters there is no proof the Patriots did in fact tape anything, and as Kurt Warner pointed out earlier this week the only plays that the team went through that day were red zone plays and the Rams scored both times they got within the twenty yard line during the game. Dick Vermeil even came out and said he didn't think taping a walkthrough gave you any edge because it's not even a practice, just a quick refresher on a few plays. That the accusation of the alleged cheating came out the week of the Superbowl this year alone should have cast doubt on the validity of it.
Well it doesn't really matter. The egos and grandstanding will not be swayed by any of us. Congress, Specter and Clemens have made it clear they are going to waste as much time and money to brag as many headlines as possible over this farce. Me, I'm grabbing my popcorn and hope I don't spit up my Pepsi because this is just too damn funny.
One of my favorite comedies is an under-rated Bill Murray film called "The Life Aquatic with Steve Zissou", mostly because it is based around some of the most absurd humor ever put on camera. This past week I've gotten to see another kind of comedy played out in Washington D.C. that makes the scripted oddities of that Wes Anderson film look like the tired pop culture jokes from the "Epic Movie/Meet the Spartans" crew. I'm of course referring to the Roger Clemens Congressional hearing and Arlen Specter's talks with NFL Commissioner Roger Goodell. The former came about as the result of one mans ego and the second because of, well, one mans ego. Both were allegedly done to clean things up in the two respective sports, but in the end it was all just a three ring circus with no ringmaster, elephants or trapeze artists, just a bunch of poorly trained clowns cavorting around and getting laughs for all the wrong reasons.
Let's start with the big headline grabber of the month, Roger Clemens going before Congress. First and foremost, that wasn't even supposed to happen. Henry Waxman even came out and said as much, stating that the person who pushed for the hearing was Roger Clemens. It was Clemens who held the big press conference where he played a secretly recorded phone conversation with his former trainer Brian McNamee. It was Clemens who forced the issue and grabbed as much spotlight time as possible. On the other side of the coin it was Congress who started having these kangaroo court hearings in the first place and Congress who split almost universally down party lines during Clemens' questioning last week.
I have to admit I was laughing nearly the whole time during Clemens' testimony. It was such a joke to watch. Prior to the televised questioning Clemens had talked to the members privately and obviously(along with his lawyers) thought he was going to get treated with kid gloves, and why not? The same members who were going to question him publicly were posing for pictures, getting autographs, glad-handing and generally mugging for the camera with their new best friend Roger Clemens. So when the Rocket had to sit down and answer some actual questions regarding the facts in the investigation he looked like the proverbial deer in the headlights, constantly looking to his lawyer for advice on how to answer.
Bu Congress wasn't done there. In order to get even more belly laughs out of the viewers at home they obviously decided going into the hearing that there would be a strict adherence to party lines, meaning the Democrats would ask the hard questions while most of the Republicans tossed Roger some nice juicy softballs or just forgo questioning at all and just kiss his (allegedly) abscessed ass. Hell, for the most part even the questions the Democrats threw weren't even close to a strike. It wasn't until the hearing was almost over that Elijah Cummings finally brought the heat and flat out asked Clemens, why would McNemee tell the truth about Pettitte and Knoblauch but lie about Clemens? If Pettitte is an honest man who openly admitted to using HGH, does that not mean that McNemee is telling the truth about Roger? The Rocket struck out looking.
To add to the already outrageous levels of humor, we also got to see folks like republican Chris Shays practically shouting at McNemee, saying "You deal drugs!" as if that somehow means he's lying under oath. I wonder if Shays has ever worked a narcotics case before. Somehow I doubt it. Shays was backed nicely by Virginia Foxx who brought props to the set in the form of posters from various times in Rogers career as being definitive proof that Clemens could not have been on performance enhancing drugs(and proof she has no freaking clue what the hell she's talking about). Someone just give these guys an Emmy already, they made Frasier look like Joey.
But we're forgetting, this was a double feature. Yes we also got to see Arlen Specter do his best song and dance for the camera about whether or not the New England Patriots secretly filmed the St. Louis Rams final walkthrough before SuperBowl 36. OK, just so we're clear here, the US Army is getting ready to shoot down a Russian satellite, the economy is tanking faster then the Kansas City Royals and the Canadian dollar is getting ready to start looking down on the greenback on a long term basis but what America needs right now is an investigation as to whether or not the Patriots cheated in a game 6 years ago?
But Specter will not be swayed. He met with NFL Commissioner Roger Goodell and has made it clear he's going to see this through. What he means to accomplish I don't honestly know. For starters there is no proof the Patriots did in fact tape anything, and as Kurt Warner pointed out earlier this week the only plays that the team went through that day were red zone plays and the Rams scored both times they got within the twenty yard line during the game. Dick Vermeil even came out and said he didn't think taping a walkthrough gave you any edge because it's not even a practice, just a quick refresher on a few plays. That the accusation of the alleged cheating came out the week of the Superbowl this year alone should have cast doubt on the validity of it.
Well it doesn't really matter. The egos and grandstanding will not be swayed by any of us. Congress, Specter and Clemens have made it clear they are going to waste as much time and money to brag as many headlines as possible over this farce. Me, I'm grabbing my popcorn and hope I don't spit up my Pepsi because this is just too damn funny.
Saturday, February 2, 2008
Pot Shots at the Colossus
If dismissal was the highest form of flattery the New England Patriots would be blushing like virgin brides on the honeymoon. Seriously, this team is on the verge of 19-0 and still I'm seeing and hearing television and radio interviews and reading articles about how this in one of, if not the greatest, team in the history of the NFL. It seems every time I turn around there is someone ready to brush them aside like they were a bunch of also-rans and not a team that is on the verge of setting one of the most incredible records in sports history.
What do they still have to prove? How many more records to they have to set before people stop trying to kick them to the curb? They already have the most touchdown passes by a Quarterback(50), most TD receptions by a player(23), most points in a season(589), finished first in passing yards and total yards per game, 4th in overall defense and have the most consecutive wins in one season(18 going for 19). What the hell else do they have to do? Nothing in my opinion, except win the Super Bowl. Of course, in the opinion of some others though, they haven't done anything. Look, I'm not going to bore you with every article on this subject, so instead I'll just focus on two recent ones from Sign On San Diego and the Indy Star.
Nick Canepa of SoSD makes the argument that the Patriots do not rank amongst the greatest teams of all times because, get this, they don't have enough Hall of Fame players on the roster. That's it? That's your reasoning? They have crushed nearly every record imaginable in just one year but because not enough players on the roster will make it to footballs shrine it doesn't count? Give me a break, some of the best teams in sports history didn't have a lot of all time greats, just as some of the all time greats never won the big game. The 1995/96 Bulls went 72-10 but nobody on that team outside of Jordan and Jackson are going to Springfield(dennis Rodman should but that is an argument for another time). The 1998 Yankees won 125 games but only Rivera, Jeter and Torre stand out as Cooperstown caliber. Dan Marino never won a Superbowl, Mats Sundin may never win a Stanley Cup and Barry Bonds has no rings.
Let's be honest, any Hall of Fame is based around personal achievements, not team results. Individually the Patriots may not be anything special, but as a team their has never been a squad as dominant. Hell, the Patriots are probably proud of that fact. Given their incredible success this decade and the low draft order as a result, the Patriots ability to consistently field a winning team is staggering. And with a salary cap, balanced schedules designed to have the best play the best and free agency this sort of thing is not supposed to be possible in todays NFL. Yet here they are, one win away from the most incredible season ever. Just because only a few of them will make it to Canton doesn't mean they aren't a great team. If anything it shows just how good they really are as a unit.
Which brings me to Bob Kravitz' brilliantly stupid piece on how Bill Belichick and the Patriots aren't good, they're just lucky. As with Canepa he trots out a ludicrous piece of evidence to try and support his theory. That of course being the Patriots franchise player Tom Brady. Kravitz insists that the Patriots were lucky to draft him in the 6th round, ignoring the simple fact that Brady had been a back-up most of his college career and was not highly regarded by many scouts. Taking a player like Brady in the 6th round isn't luck, it's damn good scouting and drafting. Next of course was the injury to Drew Bledsoe. With Bledsoe's season over early the Pats looked to Brady and he delivered. Luck? Hell no, that's called having all your bases covered by having reliable back-ups in case of injury.
What is even more insane about this type of argument is that prior to this season most reporters had dismissed Brady's success as a result of Belichicks coaching. How many times was Belichicks name the first one to come up when talking about the Patriots 3 Super Bowls in four years? For the first few years even New England fans were dismissing Brady as a product of Belichick and his system. But now that Brady finally has some receivers to throw to suddenly it's all about Tom not Bill. Get serious Kravitz. In the same article you compare Belichick to Mike Shannahan, saying how the latter couldn't win without John Elway, completely ignoring the fact that the Broncos beat the Patriots in the 2005 playoffs with Jake Plummer of all people. To quote one reader of the article, one Bangin from Bridgeton, MO, "This is BAD journalism".
Look at the Patriots over this decade. Look at the players they've won with. The players they've dumped, the ones they brought in. From disgruntled problems children like Randy Moss and Cory Dillon to old veterans dumped by other teams like Junior Seau the Patriots find talent every way they can and fit them into the group. No other team has had this kind of success with this amount of turnover. No other team replaces players with such ease and no other team has been as good on both sides of the ball since the turn of the century. Any fool can see that takes more then luck.
So save me your comparisons to the Steelers of the 1970's, the Dallas Cowboys on the 1990's or the 49ers. Different eras, different problems to overcome. The Patriots have done all this at a time when the NFL is set up to prevent dynasties from ever happening. They have re-vamped, re-organized and re-built the team constantly and yet still have an incredible winning percentage. While other teams find brief success before salaries and free agency cripple them the Patriots win and win big year in and year out. This year they go for the ultimate record in football, and if that doesn't make them one of the greatest teams ever in your book, then your book should wind up in the bargain bin.
What do they still have to prove? How many more records to they have to set before people stop trying to kick them to the curb? They already have the most touchdown passes by a Quarterback(50), most TD receptions by a player(23), most points in a season(589), finished first in passing yards and total yards per game, 4th in overall defense and have the most consecutive wins in one season(18 going for 19). What the hell else do they have to do? Nothing in my opinion, except win the Super Bowl. Of course, in the opinion of some others though, they haven't done anything. Look, I'm not going to bore you with every article on this subject, so instead I'll just focus on two recent ones from Sign On San Diego and the Indy Star.
Nick Canepa of SoSD makes the argument that the Patriots do not rank amongst the greatest teams of all times because, get this, they don't have enough Hall of Fame players on the roster. That's it? That's your reasoning? They have crushed nearly every record imaginable in just one year but because not enough players on the roster will make it to footballs shrine it doesn't count? Give me a break, some of the best teams in sports history didn't have a lot of all time greats, just as some of the all time greats never won the big game. The 1995/96 Bulls went 72-10 but nobody on that team outside of Jordan and Jackson are going to Springfield(dennis Rodman should but that is an argument for another time). The 1998 Yankees won 125 games but only Rivera, Jeter and Torre stand out as Cooperstown caliber. Dan Marino never won a Superbowl, Mats Sundin may never win a Stanley Cup and Barry Bonds has no rings.
Let's be honest, any Hall of Fame is based around personal achievements, not team results. Individually the Patriots may not be anything special, but as a team their has never been a squad as dominant. Hell, the Patriots are probably proud of that fact. Given their incredible success this decade and the low draft order as a result, the Patriots ability to consistently field a winning team is staggering. And with a salary cap, balanced schedules designed to have the best play the best and free agency this sort of thing is not supposed to be possible in todays NFL. Yet here they are, one win away from the most incredible season ever. Just because only a few of them will make it to Canton doesn't mean they aren't a great team. If anything it shows just how good they really are as a unit.
Which brings me to Bob Kravitz' brilliantly stupid piece on how Bill Belichick and the Patriots aren't good, they're just lucky. As with Canepa he trots out a ludicrous piece of evidence to try and support his theory. That of course being the Patriots franchise player Tom Brady. Kravitz insists that the Patriots were lucky to draft him in the 6th round, ignoring the simple fact that Brady had been a back-up most of his college career and was not highly regarded by many scouts. Taking a player like Brady in the 6th round isn't luck, it's damn good scouting and drafting. Next of course was the injury to Drew Bledsoe. With Bledsoe's season over early the Pats looked to Brady and he delivered. Luck? Hell no, that's called having all your bases covered by having reliable back-ups in case of injury.
What is even more insane about this type of argument is that prior to this season most reporters had dismissed Brady's success as a result of Belichicks coaching. How many times was Belichicks name the first one to come up when talking about the Patriots 3 Super Bowls in four years? For the first few years even New England fans were dismissing Brady as a product of Belichick and his system. But now that Brady finally has some receivers to throw to suddenly it's all about Tom not Bill. Get serious Kravitz. In the same article you compare Belichick to Mike Shannahan, saying how the latter couldn't win without John Elway, completely ignoring the fact that the Broncos beat the Patriots in the 2005 playoffs with Jake Plummer of all people. To quote one reader of the article, one Bangin from Bridgeton, MO, "This is BAD journalism".
Look at the Patriots over this decade. Look at the players they've won with. The players they've dumped, the ones they brought in. From disgruntled problems children like Randy Moss and Cory Dillon to old veterans dumped by other teams like Junior Seau the Patriots find talent every way they can and fit them into the group. No other team has had this kind of success with this amount of turnover. No other team replaces players with such ease and no other team has been as good on both sides of the ball since the turn of the century. Any fool can see that takes more then luck.
So save me your comparisons to the Steelers of the 1970's, the Dallas Cowboys on the 1990's or the 49ers. Different eras, different problems to overcome. The Patriots have done all this at a time when the NFL is set up to prevent dynasties from ever happening. They have re-vamped, re-organized and re-built the team constantly and yet still have an incredible winning percentage. While other teams find brief success before salaries and free agency cripple them the Patriots win and win big year in and year out. This year they go for the ultimate record in football, and if that doesn't make them one of the greatest teams ever in your book, then your book should wind up in the bargain bin.
Saturday, January 26, 2008
Dear God Make it Stop!!!
It's All Star Weekend in the NHL. Soon it'll be Pro Bowl time followed by the NBA All Star Game. And I'm not going anywhere near them. Seriously, All Star games suck. Flat out, completely, harder then Tera Patrick after a new contract SUCK! They resemble nothing like the actual sport and are not the least bit entertaining. Nobody plays hard, there is little to no physical contact and generally the games look tired and lazy. This really needs to stop.
Perhaps no sport has suffered more from the effects of an All Star game then the NHL. Given it's limited television broadcasts and media coverage, the NHL has turned All Star weekend into it's major marketing push. Flashy light shows, cameras at every angle and area in the rink(including under center ice), microphones on players, the works. Of course, since no one ever throws a hit, drops the gloves, bumps the goalie or crashes the net, the game looks nothing like what you would see during the 82 game regular schedule or the playoffs. Instead the NHL showcases a game of shinney hockey with millionaire players.
One would think that given the failure of this giant marketing push to generate any new interest ini hockey Bettman and company would try to come up with ways to showcase the game as it is truly played. Yes you would think that, but no. Instead this year they've decided to go the gimmick route. On top of the usual hardest shot, fastest skater, puck handling skills demonstrations, the NHL has added an NBA style breakaway competition. Basically it's who can come up with the most creative way to score a goal while a panel of judges scores them. Anyone who's ever seen the NBA dunk contest knows that this sort of thing is hit or miss, very good, or just plain awful. While it looks good at first, once shots start missing or players lose the puck it just gets ugly.
the Pro Bowl considered(correctly) to be the most useless game in the NFL. It takes place after the regular season when many players haven't taken the field in weeks or months and more or less just want to go out, take a few plays then hit Maui's beaches. Last year when Sean Taylor ran over the punter he was, for who knows what reasons, widely criticized. Hell, it was easily the most exiting thing to happen in the Pro Bowl in a decade. At least someone played a down like it was in the regular season. The rest of the game looked like a light contact practice with the players obviously thinking of surf not turf.
I don't really need to go into the NBA All Star game do I? OK fine, here let me break it down for you. Five step lay-up, dunk, 3 pointer, lay-up, lay-up, dunk, dunk, lay-up, lay-up, lay-up, dunk, ally-oop, dunk, lay-up, 3 pointer, lay-up, dunk dunk dunk. Game over, MVP gets hailed for his efforts and I turn off my radio for two days.
Yeah yeah, I know it's all for the fans but let's get serious. Do real fans want to see their favorite players show up and play half-assed? Do real fans want to see neither team play defense and just stand around allowing opponents to land easy shots, passes or goals? All Star games are for fringe fans to ooh and awww over while owners and other rich executives sit around drinking Grey Goose martinis and getting their picture taken with whatever celebrities have been hauled out for the event.
There's an All Star game coming to my city in a few years and as you can imagine everyone is making a big deal out of it. The local sports honks are hyping it, the mayor and council are getting ready for a few dozen photo ops and everyone is acting like it's some big deal. Not me though, I really couldn't care less. I'll be at home watching Slap Shot because frankly that movie is closer to real hockey then any All Star game ever will be.
Perhaps no sport has suffered more from the effects of an All Star game then the NHL. Given it's limited television broadcasts and media coverage, the NHL has turned All Star weekend into it's major marketing push. Flashy light shows, cameras at every angle and area in the rink(including under center ice), microphones on players, the works. Of course, since no one ever throws a hit, drops the gloves, bumps the goalie or crashes the net, the game looks nothing like what you would see during the 82 game regular schedule or the playoffs. Instead the NHL showcases a game of shinney hockey with millionaire players.
One would think that given the failure of this giant marketing push to generate any new interest ini hockey Bettman and company would try to come up with ways to showcase the game as it is truly played. Yes you would think that, but no. Instead this year they've decided to go the gimmick route. On top of the usual hardest shot, fastest skater, puck handling skills demonstrations, the NHL has added an NBA style breakaway competition. Basically it's who can come up with the most creative way to score a goal while a panel of judges scores them. Anyone who's ever seen the NBA dunk contest knows that this sort of thing is hit or miss, very good, or just plain awful. While it looks good at first, once shots start missing or players lose the puck it just gets ugly.
the Pro Bowl considered(correctly) to be the most useless game in the NFL. It takes place after the regular season when many players haven't taken the field in weeks or months and more or less just want to go out, take a few plays then hit Maui's beaches. Last year when Sean Taylor ran over the punter he was, for who knows what reasons, widely criticized. Hell, it was easily the most exiting thing to happen in the Pro Bowl in a decade. At least someone played a down like it was in the regular season. The rest of the game looked like a light contact practice with the players obviously thinking of surf not turf.
I don't really need to go into the NBA All Star game do I? OK fine, here let me break it down for you. Five step lay-up, dunk, 3 pointer, lay-up, lay-up, dunk, dunk, lay-up, lay-up, lay-up, dunk, ally-oop, dunk, lay-up, 3 pointer, lay-up, dunk dunk dunk. Game over, MVP gets hailed for his efforts and I turn off my radio for two days.
Yeah yeah, I know it's all for the fans but let's get serious. Do real fans want to see their favorite players show up and play half-assed? Do real fans want to see neither team play defense and just stand around allowing opponents to land easy shots, passes or goals? All Star games are for fringe fans to ooh and awww over while owners and other rich executives sit around drinking Grey Goose martinis and getting their picture taken with whatever celebrities have been hauled out for the event.
There's an All Star game coming to my city in a few years and as you can imagine everyone is making a big deal out of it. The local sports honks are hyping it, the mayor and council are getting ready for a few dozen photo ops and everyone is acting like it's some big deal. Not me though, I really couldn't care less. I'll be at home watching Slap Shot because frankly that movie is closer to real hockey then any All Star game ever will be.
Sunday, January 13, 2008
Sinking the Good Ship Maple Leafs
Back from vacation and ready to rant.
So any guesses as to which hockey team makes the most money in the NHL? OK, obvious answer. Now, how much of their profits are spent on actually developing the future of that team? If you said less then 1 percent you'd be correct. Best estimate put last years profits for the Toronto Maple Leafs at over 50 million dollars. Their scouting budget a paltry 1.5 million, barely the NHL average and far below that of teams like Detroit and Philadelphia. While other teams hire the best front office people money can buy, the Leafs continue to hire people who are either inexperienced or under qualified. They hire good coaches then undermine them, draft young talent then trade them and flat out refuse to address the real problems.
That would of course be the Board of Directors for MLSE. More specifically Richard Peddie and Larry Tannenbaum, the two alpha males vying for control of the team. While neither actually own the Leafs(the true owners are the Ontario Teachers Pension Fund), they have become accustomed to being in charge with little to no opposition, except each other. Make no mistake there is a power struggle going on, and Peddie has the upper hand.
Peddie knows jack about hockey, but he does know how to make money. Be it ticket sales, television contracts or massive real estate deals brokered on the profits and value of the Leafs, Peddie knows how to make a buck out of pocket lint. For that reason he is kept around, he makes the Pension Fund a lot of returns. But while he's good for business, he's bad for sport. Peddie is the one responsible for hiring Rob Babcock to GM the Raptors, who promptly wasted the 8th overall pick in the 2004 draft on Rafael Araujo and traded Vince Carter for weak draft picks, bench players and Alonzo Mourning(who never even bothered to show up).
He also pushed for the hiring of John Ferguson Junior, a man with the best intentions but no experience as a GM. JFJ was doomed from the start, at once being called upon to rebuild the team from the ground up and keep them in the playoffs. Without being able to commit one way or the other, Ferguson made ill-advised moves and trades and the team has been steadily falling since. Recently Peddie has stated he may have made a mistake in hiring Ferguson, but all he is doing is trying to cover up his own screw-ups.
Let's face it, had Brian Colangelo not been looking for a new challenge after helping to rebuild the Suns Babcock could very well still be in charge of the Raptors. Indeed the only reason Babcock was released was because the team was not turning a profit the the Pension Fund wanted to know why. Not so with the Leafs though.
It is basically impossible for the Toronto Maple Leafs to lose money. For crying out loud a one armed monkey with a full frontal lobotomy could make money with that team. The luxury suites are all sold out, the lower bowls are bought out into the next century and the team has multiple lucrative television contracts with TSN, Sportsnet and it's own station Leafs TV. Even with the team headed for a third straight year without making the playoffs(the first time that's happened since the mid 1920s) it is still expected to surpass it's profits from last year.
Yet even with all that money the board will not fix the problems. This past summer Scotty Bowman(SCOTTY BOWMAN) was interviewed for a position on the team. He was very interested and in an interview with CBC's Ron MacClean this past Saturday revealed that he had spoken with Tanenbaum in August and had stipulated he would take the job only if he was given a Brian Colangelo type deal, meaning no interference from the Board of Directors. Tannenbaum agreed, Peddie did not. The Board sided with the money man and one of the greatest hockey minds of all time was brushed aside.
Supposedly there is going to be a major meeting of all the Board members this Tuesday to discuss where the team is going. Here's a few pointers for you boys. Fire Peddie. Fire Ferguson. While your at it tell all those left-overs and hangers on on the Board to shut up and smile and nod when told to. Then take all that money you're making and steal a GM from Detroit or New Jerseys front office, spend a few million and hire more scouts, give them the best equipment money can buy and re-build the foundation of the team. While you're at it, trade Sundin, then a few more. Buy out who you can't move and get ready to suck for a few years. Draft a franchise player and build around him. Spend more on coaches and managers then any other team to make sure you get the best. Christ, I've just spelled out a more cohesive plan in five minute then any these idiots have had in their lives.
The ship needs to be sunk, and it's Captain and more then a few crew members need to go with it. The Leafs used to be respected. They used to have the most feared scouting and farm system in the NHL. They used to be great. They can be again, but only if the root of the problem is expunged once and for all.
So any guesses as to which hockey team makes the most money in the NHL? OK, obvious answer. Now, how much of their profits are spent on actually developing the future of that team? If you said less then 1 percent you'd be correct. Best estimate put last years profits for the Toronto Maple Leafs at over 50 million dollars. Their scouting budget a paltry 1.5 million, barely the NHL average and far below that of teams like Detroit and Philadelphia. While other teams hire the best front office people money can buy, the Leafs continue to hire people who are either inexperienced or under qualified. They hire good coaches then undermine them, draft young talent then trade them and flat out refuse to address the real problems.
That would of course be the Board of Directors for MLSE. More specifically Richard Peddie and Larry Tannenbaum, the two alpha males vying for control of the team. While neither actually own the Leafs(the true owners are the Ontario Teachers Pension Fund), they have become accustomed to being in charge with little to no opposition, except each other. Make no mistake there is a power struggle going on, and Peddie has the upper hand.
Peddie knows jack about hockey, but he does know how to make money. Be it ticket sales, television contracts or massive real estate deals brokered on the profits and value of the Leafs, Peddie knows how to make a buck out of pocket lint. For that reason he is kept around, he makes the Pension Fund a lot of returns. But while he's good for business, he's bad for sport. Peddie is the one responsible for hiring Rob Babcock to GM the Raptors, who promptly wasted the 8th overall pick in the 2004 draft on Rafael Araujo and traded Vince Carter for weak draft picks, bench players and Alonzo Mourning(who never even bothered to show up).
He also pushed for the hiring of John Ferguson Junior, a man with the best intentions but no experience as a GM. JFJ was doomed from the start, at once being called upon to rebuild the team from the ground up and keep them in the playoffs. Without being able to commit one way or the other, Ferguson made ill-advised moves and trades and the team has been steadily falling since. Recently Peddie has stated he may have made a mistake in hiring Ferguson, but all he is doing is trying to cover up his own screw-ups.
Let's face it, had Brian Colangelo not been looking for a new challenge after helping to rebuild the Suns Babcock could very well still be in charge of the Raptors. Indeed the only reason Babcock was released was because the team was not turning a profit the the Pension Fund wanted to know why. Not so with the Leafs though.
It is basically impossible for the Toronto Maple Leafs to lose money. For crying out loud a one armed monkey with a full frontal lobotomy could make money with that team. The luxury suites are all sold out, the lower bowls are bought out into the next century and the team has multiple lucrative television contracts with TSN, Sportsnet and it's own station Leafs TV. Even with the team headed for a third straight year without making the playoffs(the first time that's happened since the mid 1920s) it is still expected to surpass it's profits from last year.
Yet even with all that money the board will not fix the problems. This past summer Scotty Bowman(SCOTTY BOWMAN) was interviewed for a position on the team. He was very interested and in an interview with CBC's Ron MacClean this past Saturday revealed that he had spoken with Tanenbaum in August and had stipulated he would take the job only if he was given a Brian Colangelo type deal, meaning no interference from the Board of Directors. Tannenbaum agreed, Peddie did not. The Board sided with the money man and one of the greatest hockey minds of all time was brushed aside.
Supposedly there is going to be a major meeting of all the Board members this Tuesday to discuss where the team is going. Here's a few pointers for you boys. Fire Peddie. Fire Ferguson. While your at it tell all those left-overs and hangers on on the Board to shut up and smile and nod when told to. Then take all that money you're making and steal a GM from Detroit or New Jerseys front office, spend a few million and hire more scouts, give them the best equipment money can buy and re-build the foundation of the team. While you're at it, trade Sundin, then a few more. Buy out who you can't move and get ready to suck for a few years. Draft a franchise player and build around him. Spend more on coaches and managers then any other team to make sure you get the best. Christ, I've just spelled out a more cohesive plan in five minute then any these idiots have had in their lives.
The ship needs to be sunk, and it's Captain and more then a few crew members need to go with it. The Leafs used to be respected. They used to have the most feared scouting and farm system in the NHL. They used to be great. They can be again, but only if the root of the problem is expunged once and for all.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
