Two for Elbowing

Paring down the goalie gear

Paring down goalie equipment seems to be the continuing story this season. We came into the season with the usual suspects whining about the goalies having an unfair advantage, and the GM's meeting seems to have done nothing else but discuss the state of the gear. 

Even former members in good standing of the "Goaltenders Union", Darryl Rheaugh and Brian Hayward, have said the goalie equipment needs to be cut down to size. Bet that makes them popular in the goalie's corner of the locker room!

But before all those people who want to turn the tables and go after the guy *in* the mask with a chain saw, some things to think about:

1. The NHL doesn't live in a vaccuum: I know this may come as a surprise to the GMs and various NHL columnists, but there's a whole bunch of hockey out there that isn't NHL. If the NHL cuts back on the gear to the point where a number of goalies decide that playing in Europe beats taking multiple bone bruises, the game *will* suffer. Oh, Europe will fall in line, just like university hockey and all the other ways to the NHL not in the system? Really?  How about the World Junior champsionships, the World Hockey Championships, heck the Olympics?  Do the NHL GMs still think the rest of the hockey world rolls over and pees for them?  There's peeing going on, that's for sure, but I'm not seeing a lot of rolling over these days.

2. Who's paying for this party? Okay, so you cut the pads down to 10 inches or some clever boy comes up with a way to wrap the leg pads around the shins, and they cut the glove size and the blocker size, etc.   If the NHL does get their way and it somehow magically ripples through the hockey system, there's a bunch of hockey equipment that suddenly is of no use.  I guess the NHL GMs, and those ex-goalie color analysts all make enough money that if they have to swap out their kid's  equipment, hey no hassle. Maybe after changing the rules, they'll switch their little goalies to center or something!  But for real people, goalie gear is a serious expense, and even if the local league is helping to foot the bill, someone is going to have to pay for all that new equipment. Better get your PR people on this in advance, because the first tearful hockey mom on HNIC, and you all look like throughtless creeps.

3. "But it looked good in the photos":  If you skate too close to the edge of biometric data (you're doing biometric data, right?  right?) someone at either end of the spectrum is going to get hurt, maybe because the pretection wasn't big enough, maybe because someone forgot that as they cut the width and the height of the pads, maybe the ability to absorb shock goes down in a non-linear fashion (oops!). And since no one was thinking about sizing the equipment down, it works fine for adults, but the kids start getting linear fractures of their tibia.  All I'm seeing are a bunch of people who are running like mad towards "we must make it harder for the goalies to tend goal", and not thinking about the consequences.

And that's the thing--the GMs are running towards a "solution", not to original problem ("fans want more scoring--how do we get more scoring?), but to one of the contributing factors. Why aren't we seeing any evidence that someone actually thought about this?

No games on trade deadline day...

SportingNews.com - Your expert source for NHL Hockey stats, scores, standings, blogs and fantasy news from NHL Hockey columnists:

hat's why in the spirit of the season, we propose the idea that NHL should schedule no games on the day of the trade deadline.

Just noticed that Vic Chi, formerly Sharks beat writer for the Merc, is writing about hockey again for the Sporting News. Welcome back and well done -- Vic's a heck of a writer who knows the game well. And I expect he's been writing for a while and I've just not noticed. My bad.

But -- his idea of no games on trade deadline day? I dunno. It seems to me that trade deadline is really less about the league and the game than it is an excuse for the folks in the media to make the story about themselves.

Vic talks about exposure to the game, but if you take a step back and see how the media treats trade deadline (especially up in Canada where TSN tries to out Jerry the labor day telethon in coverage), it really isn't about the game, it's about the talking heads.

When trades and the analysis of trades start pushing the actual games, how is that really good for the game?

I just don't buy it. Sorry. Especially when, as seems usual these days, we're an hour into TSN coverage of trade deadline day, they're out of talking points, no real trades have happened, and they start blaming the league for not giving them anything interesting to talk about...

Abolish the CBA

KuklasKorner : Hockey:

(from The Maven, who should know better)

Interesting Idea Dep’t. In the next CBA, why doesn’t the NHL itself just abolish the “no-trade” clause in contracts? …

well, probably because you don't abolish anything in a CBA, you negotiate it. Which means the players have to agree to it, which means you have to give them some compromise somewhere else, because you can bet the players hate this idea and won't give it up easily.

So what do you give the players that they'll accept in return to let you take away no trade clauses? Free agency at age 22?

It's actually a good idea, if you ask me. Just not practical. The real question is at what cost would it be to get this negotiated into the next CBA? And I can't believe the owners would find the cost palatable.

ESPN - Having trouble figuring out this season? Here are my three big reasons - NHL

ESPN - Having trouble figuring out this season? Here are my three big reasons - NHL:

Three-point games keep everyone in the playoff picture. The games become conservative as they progress and tend to get unleashed after a point is secured when 4-on-4 play begins. My answer to that is to give every team a point just for showing up!

I'm more and more coming to hate overtime points. It rewards the wrong damn thing: not winning in regulation. Why is a game where you DON'T SUCCEED worth more than one where you do?

So here's my recoommendation.

Regulation win: 3 points to the winner, zero to the loser.
Overtime win: 2 points to the winner, 1 to the loser.
Shootout win: 2 points to the winner, zero to the loser.

In all cases, you give teams the incentive to GO FOR IT ALREADY, not hang back and wait for the point. Don't get it done early, it costs you.

Or if you're one of those people religiously tied to two points for a win, then use 2-0, 2-1, 1-0. Again, make overtime and shootouts worth progressively less, not more. And watch the last five minutes of regulation go crazy.

(heck, I'm also in favor of (a) dry scraping the ice before overtime, (b) ten minute overtime, (c) THEN shootout, if we haven't decided it. Chances are, we'll rarely see a shootout. which is fine by me)

If Sundin doesn't waive, Leafs should wave bye-bye to their captain - NHL

ESPN - If Sundin doesn't waive, Leafs should wave bye-bye to their captain - NHL:

No one knows what Sundin will say when this offer is presented to him, but the Leafs' course of action should be very clear if he maintains his stated position that he has no intention of leaving Toronto.

First, Fletcher should immediately strip Sundin of the captain's "C". Then, Fletcher should make it very clear he will not re-sign the unrestricted free agent this summer or strongly recommend to the next full-time GM that Sundin not be re-signed.

After all, what kind of role model is Sundin if he refuses to commit the ultimate act of leadership by helping the team he professes to love get better?

Let's not forget that nothing happens in a vacuum, unless you're a sports writer.

So, stop for a second and think about what message doing something like this would send -- not to Sundin, because obviously he's no longer useful to the Leafs so he gets jettisoned like a slab of meat -- but to the other Toronto Maple Leaf players?

What message does this send to prospective free agents about what will happen if they sign in Toronto? Toronto has for years taken advantage of the "I grew up wanting to play for the Leafs" factor, but it only goes so far before the abuse of the franchise outweighs the tradition. Ask Harold Ballard about that.

Is the short-term gain the Leafs might get for this worth the potential future disasters?

Pop quiz: how many players in the last 20 years have RETIRED as captain of the Canadiens? How hard is it for the Canadiens to sign unrestricted free agents and retain their own? Now, the former isn't the PRIMARY reason for problems with the latter, but it's a strong indication of how a franchise views and treats its veterans; someone tell me why, if the Leafs did that to Sundin, any veteran with any common sense and market value would ever want to sign with Toronto?

This is a truly stupid idea. It's not harsh, it's abusive. And while the business of hockey is a tough place -- and needs to be -- this wouldn't JUST piss off Leaf fans and ruin whatever good will that might exist between the Leafs and Sundin (do the leafs really need another Dave Keon wandering the halls?) -- think of the impact on their ability to sign and keep free agents, once it becomes clear just how little they care about their players.

The cost is a lot higher than pissing off Sundin here. Get over it; if he wants to stay, how is that so damned bad?

KuklasKorner : Canucks and Beyond : Bright Lights, Small Town

KuklasKorner : Canucks and Beyond : Bright Lights, Small Town:

While I can appreciate what Houston is saying, I’m not convinced that it’s all bad to have one day dedicated to positive stories. After all, Hockey Day in Canada isn’t entirely about the sport—it’s a metaphor, idealized as it may be, about the people in this country.

HDIC builds its own mythology out of hockey vignettes across the landscape, stories that are ultimately about people’s lives as much as they are about hockey.

So I was happy to live without “journalism” for a day—I figure Al Strachan and others will be back in front of a camera fast enough. But meanwhile. I see no harm—and a great deal of good—in sharing a day of “fluff.” Shmaltzy as it may be.

Alanah is perfectly right here. Laurie and I loved Hockey Day in Canada, as usual. Seeing it land in Duncan where we've hung out a few times made it even better.

And the professional critics out there may not appreciate it, but there's a time and a place for a celebration -- and that's what Hockey Day in Canada is. Maybe some of you don't see why it's a bad idea to bring up the bride's long weekend with that bantam team up at the wedding reception, and for those that are so tied up in seeing the bad side, I feel sorry for you.

To me, I see nothiing wrong with one day a year where everyone sits down and talks about what's GOOD about hockey. After all, isn't that why we're involved with it? If it isn't or if you've forgotten how to see the good things, I REALLY feel sorry for you.

Hockey Day in Canada, keep it up. Well done.

Sharks over the last week...

Sorry for the lack of posting, was off involved with Other Things and just didn't get anything written in a timely manner. (hint: it's all Apple's fault).

I did want to talk about the last three games of the Sharks, though; this may surprise a few folks, but I found them to be the most encouraging sign yet that the Sharks are going to be a force in the playoffs.

(but first, a quick congratulations to Ron Wilson for 500 wins, and Jeremy Roenick for his 1300th. Awesome milestones!)

Game 1, Colorado. I get to use a phrase I haven't used much this year: their goalie stole the game. the Sharks significantly outplayed Colorado on almost all fronts -- and theodore just stoned everything. Some games, the Sharks run around with lots of energy but little precision, but here, not only should they have won, it shouldn't have been close. I'm not into moral victories this season, but all things considered, this is a positive in my book, score notwithstanding.

then Game 2, Columbus. Sharks had a great first shift, then Columbus more or less took over the game -- and Nabby stole this one. We really didn't deserve any points, but for a team to be successful, when the team isn't playing it's best, you have to rely on your key players to make a win happen anyway.

And Game 3, Nashville.... The first line just walked in and took over. thornton, Michalek, Cheechoo. Where Nabokov put the team on his shoulders against Columbus, these three did here. It wasn't even really close, although it was occasionally interesting. Nashville sure tried -- but that line dominated and the rest of the team held their own.

In all of the games, the team really didn't play their "A" game, and came out of the three games with four points, but did so in the right ways: hard, patient work, finding ways to win when everything isn't clicking, and really playing the kind of hockey you need to play to win playoff games and series.

On top of that, some really positive signs:

Nabokov gave up a total of six goals in those three games, plus one empty-net. He's shown, all of a sudden, an ability to stop penalty shots and shoot-outs, and the Sharks won their first shootout at home in two years.

Marleau was the top player against Columbus, and has been showing positive signs (negative: left the Nashville game after the 1st with a sore groin, but isn't expected to miss time).

Cheechoo is now clearly playing like Cheechoo. He's always been a 2nd half scorer, but more important, he looks confident that he's healthy and he isn't playing with a question mark. His hat trick against Columbus was three really gritty, grinding goals. He reminds me a lot of Phil Esposito when he's playing well.

The Sharks grab Jody Shelley? I like it, even though it was Jody Shelley who convinced Wilson of the need to have someone like -- Jody Shelley -- on the roster in the first place with his attack on Brad Stuart. He brings a great attitude and work ethic, and he's not a scary player on ice like Parker was (scary to his coach, not the other team...); his game is simple, sometimes awkward, but he can play on a line and be effective. And he brings that veteran "what it takes to win" attitude that Grier and Roenick bring, and I think it's important you have that to help the young players mature into that kind of player. And it's that kind of player that -- bottom line -- finds ways to win, which is in many ways more important than talent.

Oh, and by the way, the team is now > .500 at home. Something about going 8-3-1 at home since christmas.

The only real negative I see is that the Sharks still haven't shown any real ability to beat Detroit or Anaheim reliably (or at all), and the playoffs for San jose go through one or both teams. Now, if they continue to build towards the playoffs like they seem to be this probably won't be a problem, but they still have to prove it.

This is a team that took a while, but is putting the pieces together. Suddenly, I'm feeling much better about them. Even taking Marleau off the trade cart, although I still would like to see a bit more depth on defense; Semenov/Ozolinsh is an okay 7th D, a bit scary as a 6th D, and if you have to play both at the same time? but my first choice (Rob Blake; see my Jody Shelley comments) is injured, and while Brad Stuart is clearly available from LA, bringing him home is not really a smart idea now...