Leafs at the 10 game mark

When Cliff Fletcher first joined the Leafs (Gah, nearly 20 years ago!) he often spoke about evaluating a team's performance every 10 games. I imagine it was a large enough sample to see some trends and a short-enough time frame that GMs and coaches could make the requisite changes.

On the eve of the 2010-11 NHL season, I posted a series of questions about the state of the Leafs line-up.

In the spirit of Cliff Fletcher, and with the Leafs hitting the 10 game mark, I thought I'd look back at my early season questions to see if any answers or patterns have emerged...

Have the Leafs finally fixed their goaltending situation?
It looks like the tandem of Giguere and Gustavsson might have what it takes to give the Leafs their first batch of league average goaltending since the lockout. While both have looked spotty at times, they've also put up some timely saves and have held the Leafs in pretty much every game.

Will the special teams finally be special?
The Leafs' PK is clicking along quite nicely. With an 84.8% success rate, the Leafs are in 13th place and just 0.2% out of being in the NHL's top 10.

The Leafs' PP continues to be short-bus special. The Leafs are 24th in the NHL will a success rate of just 11.9%. With goal scoring at an absolute premium, this is one aspect of the game the club and the coaches need to master if the Leafs are to have any shot at success this season.

Will the Leafs D actually play D?
Turns out the answer is yes (so far). The Leafs have done a great job limiting shots - they are 2nd in the league in shots against and 6th in the League in goals against. This is a massive improvement over last season and further evidence of Toskala's incompetence. Given the lack of goal scoring punch on this team it's going to be increasingly important for the Leafs to continue to play outstanding D.

What about offence?
Based on a Pythagorean wins formula, the Leafs are going to need about 215+ goals to have a shot at 8th place in the East. That's a target that's looking a little out of reach for this team. The club is on pace to score just 189 goals*, which would be lowest total since Carolina put up 172 in 2003-2004. (*Yes, the foretasted total is low as the Leafs are coming off back-to-back shutouts, but the main point remains: this club needs offence badly and the current line-up doesn't look like they have the means to generate it).

Is Tyler Bozak a legit option as the number one centre?
Here's what I wrote a month ago:

Bozak looked tremendous in the final half of last season, but how plausible is it that an undrafted kid with 37 NHL games experience will succeed as a #1 Centre in the NHL?

After 10 games, Bozak sure isn't looking comfortable or productive in the #1 slot. Unless Bozak miraculously finds his a-game, landing a top centre, or more top 3 offensive talent, will be Burke's biggest challenge.

Has Burke misread the tea leaves again?
I thought so leading into this season, as I wrote a few weeks back:

This past off-season, Burke looked at the team and thought a scoring winger, preferably with size, was the team’s most pressing need. Yet, out of the four centres on the club, none seem prepared to handle the tough minutes. Grabovski is a serviceable #2, but there a plenty of questions of size, strength stamina (and sanity) surrounding Grabbo. In the #3 and #4 slots, the Leafs are going with John Mitchell and two AHL cast-offs. This does not seem like a recipe for success.

And it hasn't been a recipe for success. Bozak has struggled as the top pivot, Grabovski is without a single goal 10 games in and Zigomanis has been demoted to the Marlies. It's clear the Leafs need big help up the middle.

How will the kids develop on the Marlies?
I have no idea.

Hanson and Caputi are back up with the Leafs; Gunnarsson looks like he should be sent down. Kadri is improving but has been held pointless in too many games. Oscar Mueller has been benched and called invisible...something to keep an eye on when we check back in at game 20.

A layperson's look at Frogren and the CBA

Maybe the Leafs should just avoid players named Jonas.

The NHL has fined the Leafs $500,000 and a 4th round draft pick for signing Jonas Frogren to a contract that went over and above an entry level SPC.

To review, last summer, the Leafs signed Frogren to a creative contract that MLSE believed was in compliance with the CBA.

Based on my reading of the CBA, I'm pretty much guessing those sections are, Section 9.1 c:

a Player who at the time he was drafted was playing for a team outside North America or who meets the qualifications set forth in Article 8.4(a)(v) (a "European Player") who signs his first SPC at ages 25-27 shall be subject to the Entry Level System for one (1) year. A European Player who signs his first SPC at age 28 or older is not subject to the Entry Level System under any circumstances.

Section 8.4(a)(v):

a Player age 22 or older who has not been selected in a previous Entry Draft and shall be eligible to enter the League as an unrestricted Free Agent pursuant to Article 10.1 (d).

And section 10.1 (d):

Any player not eligible for claim in any future Entry Draft pursuant to this Agreement and not on a Club's Reserve List shall be an Unrestricted Free Agent. Further, any Player eligible for claim in the Entry Draft, but who was unclaimed, shall be an Unrestricted Free Agent subject to the provisions of Section 8.9(b).
(ii) Each Player referred to in subsection (d)(i) above shall, during the period of his Free Agency in accordance with Section 8.9(b), if applicable, be completely free to negotiate and sign an SPC with any Club, and any Club shall be completely free to negotiate and sign an SPC with such Player, without penalty or restriction subject to the provisions of Article 9 of this Agreement, if applicable, and without being subject to any Right of First Refusal, Draft Choice Compensation or any other compensation or equalization obligation of any kind.

As Frogren was indeed a European player, playing outside the NHL, who was 28 years old, without a previous SPC, it could be argued that he was not restricted to the limits of an entry level SPC. That's the position that the Leafs, the NHLPA and Frogren's agent Don Meehan took (and which the Leafs and Meehan stated to the media last summer).

Unfortunately for the Leafs, the NHL disagreed. From what I've been able to gather, the league argued that Frogren was to be considered a "defected player"

Under section 10.2 b of the CBA:

Definition of "Defected Player." For purposes of this Agreement, "Defected Player" means any Player not unconditionally released:
(A) who, having had an SPC with a Club, the provisions of which, including the option clauses in a 1995 SPC, have not been completely fulfilled, contracts for a period including any part of the unfulfilled portion of his SPC, with a club in a league not affiliated with the NHL or with any such league (both of which are hereinafter referred to as an "unaffiliated club") or with any other professional 32 hockey club to the exclusion of the said Club or its assignee; or
(B) who, never having been under contract to any Club, but as to who the NHL negotiation rights now or at any time hereafter shall reside in any Club, has contracted or shall contract with such an unaffiliated club.

I'm presuming that the NHL argued that Frogren had not fulfilled his contract with an unaffiliated club (in this case Färjestads) in an unaffiliated league (the SEL).

Unfortunately for Toronto, the NHL disagreed and the NHL won.

I think it's grossly unfair and incredibly simple to paint this situation as any type of incompetence on the part of the Leafs or Cliff Fletcher.

The Leafs, their lawyers, the NHLPA and Don Meehan all agreed and argued that given his age, draft status, and heritage Frogren was an unrestricted free agent who was not limited to an entry level deal.

Despite the findings and the punitive measures (the loss of the 4th round pick sort of stings, but really, what's $500K to MLSE?) I hope the Leafs continue in their efforts to be creative and to seek out alternative means of getting more draft picks and more talent into the organization.

**UPDATE**
This post attempts to explain the how, but I didn't touch on the why.

It should be noted that Frogren used the bonus money in his contract with the Leafs to buy-out his contract with Färjestads. Had Frogren not had contractual obligation to the SEL I'm presuming the NHL would not have sought sanctions against the Leafs.

Again, this is all just guess work on my part - if anyone finds some answers to this in the media, please put a link in the comments.

You don't need a weather man to know which way the wind blows

There are numerous reasons I no longer read the sports pages, but the biggest one has to be the pathetic signal to noise ratio. And good old Damien Cox has added yet more noise to the system.

Cox writes (big hat tip to uber Leaf site PPP who save me from having to actually read through this stuff ):

It continues to blow my mind that some insist Mats Sundin "owed" the Leafs the chance to trade him last winter and get draft picks and prospects for him.

Here’s what he owed the Leafs.

He owed them a willingness to play hard under the terms of his contract, to play through injuries, to provide solid leadership, to put points on the board and to set an example for young players. His job was to fulfill his playing contract, period.

To wallow in these ill-conceived, illogical past grievances against the player who was the team’s best for more than a decade is to demean not only him, but the franchise and the sport.

That's all well and good I suppose. I mean, it's not like Cox ever pursues any angles that might demean the Leafs' franchise - oh, wait..well, it's not like Cox was one of the journos who thought the Leaf's rights should be put ahead of Mats Sundin.

Unless of course you were to go to the Leafs TV site and search their video feeds for Fletcher's January 22nd press conference and maybe fast forward to the 17:49 mark. Because if you did that, you might just get to hear Damien Cox ask for a follow-up question about a certain Mr. Sundin (you know, the one who should have his rights come first. The one who didn't owe the Leafs the opportunity to trade him):

Cox: "You said, 'The most important thing is to do what's right for Mats.' Isn't the most important thing to do what's right for the Toronto Maple Leafs? First, ahead of Mats?"
Fletcher: "That's right Damien, but Mats is driving the engine here. He's an unrestricted free agent at the end of the year and he has a no-trade clause."
[long, awkward silence]

That exchange made an appearance in Cox's January 23rd column:

When it came to the possible trading of Sundin, Fletcher said: "The most
important thing is to do what's right for Mats." Questioned further as to
whether it wasn't more vital to do what was best for the hockey club, Fletcher
said: "Mats is driving the engine here."

Well, at least we know who's in charge.

That last line is a smug thing of beauty isn't it? Had Damien just let it alone, those first four lines of his column just wouldn't have that je ne sais quoi of sanctimony and disingeniousness that only Cox can deliver.

How great is it to be able to take shots like that and then 13 months later argue the other side?

Hypocrisy: reason number 1,834 that I longer turn to the sports pages for any insight into the game I love.

I'm so sick of Goodbyes

The man with the bad hair on the left is Darryl Sittler. He was a first round pick of the Toronto Maple Leafs in 1970 and was named captain in 1975 (after the Leafs asked Dave Keon to give up the C. You stay classy Toronto.)

Sittler was the captain of the Toronto Maple Leafs for five years. During that time he would play for Team Canada, make numerous all-star teams, set a record for most points in a single game (10), tie the record for most goals in a playoff match (5), and come third in the NHL scoring race with 117 points - finishing behind Guy Lafleur and Brian Trottier. He was elected to the Hockey Hall of Fame in 1989.

After a series of odd moves by Harold Ballard and Punch Imlach (including suing the NHLPA over Sittler's involvement in promotions and trading away Sittler's best-pal and line mate Lanny MacDonald) Sittler stripped the "C" from his jersey.

Re-appointed Leaf captain in 1980-81, the conflict between the players and management did not abate and the team finally asked Sittler to waive his no trade clause. Sittler agreed, but the trade talks were so protracted and ugly that Sittler was advised to take a leave of absence from the Leafs mid-season. The final trade still took two more weeks to be completed.

An all-star, first round pick, captain and good guy dealt for spare parts.

The guy on the far right (next to a young Steven Perry?) is Rick Vaive.

A former first round pick of the Vancouver Canucks, he was acquired by the Leafs in a trade that sent Bill Derlago (the Steve Perry look-alike) to the Leafs for Jerry Butler and Dave "Tiger" Williams.

Vaive was the captain of the Leafs from 1981 to 1985.

In 1982 he became the first Leaf to break the 50 goal mark. I may have been 10 at the time, but I distinctly recall that approximately 42 of his 54 goals were scored on booming slap shots from the top of the circle as he cruised down the right side of the ice.

Vaive led the Leafs in scoring (1982, 83 and 85), goals scored (1982-1985) and penalty minutes in 1981. He is the all-time highest scoring right wing in Leafs history.

In 1985 Harold Ballard thought it would be a good idea to strip Vaive of his captaincy when he was late for practice one day (you stay classy Toronto).

The Leafs dealt Vaive and Steve "Stumpy" Thomas to Chicago before the start of the 1987 season for Bob McGill, Al Secord and Ed Olczyk.


As the bottom of the card says, the man on the left in Leaf blues is Rob Ramage.

A first round pick of the Colorado Rockies, Ramage came to Toronto in 1989 via the Calgary Flames for a second round pick (interesting note: the Flames used that second round pick to select Kent Manderville, who would later be re-acquired by the Leafs as part of the Doug Gilmour mega-deal).

Ramage would play D for the Leafs for just two season before the Leafs left him unprotected in the 1991 expansion draft (you stay classy Toronto) where Ramage was claimed by Minnesota.

The man laying a beating on Bob Probert over there on your right doesn't need much of an introduction or a write-up.

Wendel Clark was a first round pick of the Leafs and one of the few bright spots for the organization in the 80s.

He wasn't a very good skater and was hurt more often than he was healthy (he averaged just 51 games a season for the Leafs) but he could fight, hit and score like no other Leaf before or since.

He had a laser for a wrist shot and anvils for fists.

Clark would captain the Leafs from 1991 to 1994, but in a stunning move, Cliff Fletcher traded Clark to the Nordiques, along with Sylvain Lefebvre, Landon Wilson and Toronto's 1st round choice for Mats Sundin, Garth Butcher, Todd Warriner and Philadelphia's 1st round choice.

Wendel would have three go-rounds with the Leafs.

He was re-acquired along with Mathieu Schneider and D.J. Smith for Darby Hendrickson, Sean Haggerty, Kenny Jonsson and Toronto's 1st round pick, only to walk away from the Leafs as a free agent just two years later, signing with Tampa Bay.

After being released by Chicago, Clark would quietly finish out his career playing in twenty games for the Leafs in 2000 and then six playoff matches where he managed to show a few sparks of his former self.

This is Doug Gilmour, arguably one of the most popular all-time Leafs.

He was acquired by Cliff Fletcher in what might be the all-time greatest trade in Leaf history.

A contractual hold-out in Calgary, Gilmour arrived in Toronto and instantly made this team a contender. He put up 49 points in his first 40 games with the Leafs and followed that up with 127 point season - the most points ever scored by a Leaf. He finished fourth in NHL scoring the following season with 111 points.

It was in the playoffs that Gimour established his legend. His wrap-around goal in double OT against Curtis Joseph and the Blues may be one of the most iconic goals scored in modern Leaf history. While the Leafs didn't make the finals that year, Gilmour would finish second in playoff scoring with 35 points.

By 1996, Leafs ownership was in turmoil and contracts were being dumped. Mike Murphy was clearly out of his element behind the Leafs bench as he took the team from perrennial playoff contender to last place (a .377 record in the first half of the season. The team would finish an ugly 30-44-8).

It was clear that Gilmour's time with the Leafs was over.

This was an awkward time for Gilmour and the Leafs. He ripped the club and his teammates after a bad loss to Vancouver that January. His play was inconsistent (the media took to calling him a "spectator"). Leaf officials called him out publicly - stating he didn't work as hard as the fans thought he did. He demanded a trade, denied demanding a trade. There were allegations that Dougie was using trade talk to fish for more money from the Leafs. And then, as the trade deadline approached, he publicly asked for a contract extension (despite having his worst year as a Leaf and an owner who was dumping salary) so he could retire a Leaf.

On February 26, he was dealt to New Jersey, along with Dave Ellet for Alyn McCauley, Steve Sullivan and Jason Smith.


Mats Sundin was named captain of the Toronto Maple Leafs on opening night 1997. He was the second longest serving captain in the NHL behind only Joe "snowblower" Sakic.

He is the Leafs all-time goal scoring leader, all-time points leader and is second on the Leafs in all-time assists.

He has the Leafs longest home-game point streak and he led the club in scoring in all but one season that he wore the Blue and White.

Eight All-Star game appearances, named to the second-team all-star team twice, the first player to score 500 goals as a Leaf. He was the captain of the Swedish Olympic gold medal winning team.

He is ranked 22nd all time in career goals (555); 34th all time in career assists (766); 30th all time in career points (1321) in the NHL.

Sundin holds the record as the longest serving European captain of an NHL franchise, he is the first Swedish player to score 500 goals and among Swedish players, Mats has the most points, goals and assists in the NHL.

Many would argue he was the greatest Leaf ever.

* * *

Something to think about on this snowy afternoon: not since George Armstrong in 1970 has a Leaf captain retired with the club.

**Addendum: Down Goes Brown brought up an interesting point in the comments about captains retiring with their team. I just happened to have this list handy as I had prepped it about a year ago for a blog post that never was. I looked at every NHL team over the past 20+ years to see how many teams had their captain retire. It's a short-list:

• Stevens in New Jersey
• Yzerman in Detroit
• Al McInnis in St. Louis
• Steve Smith in Calgary
• Paul Laus in Florida
• Messier (in his second tour) with the Rangers
• Mellanby in Atlanta.

That's it.

Every where else is a long list of buy outs, trades, and free agency. Note, I didn't include injuries in the list like Primeau in Philly and Lemieux (the first time round) in Pittsburgh

From Spineless to Incompent: A History of Leafs' GMs, Part II

A History of Leafs' GMs, Part II

1989 - 1991 Floyd Smith

Floyd Smith (AKA Sleepy Floyd, Count Floyd, Trader Smith) gets his own blog entry, not so much for what he did as a GM (make a million trades and see his team hit rock bottom) but because of all the turmoil that surrounded the Leafs during his tenure.

The similarities between JFJ’s run and Floyd Smith’s are amazing – from conflict at the Board Level to an initial effort to go with youth that resulted in whole sale trades of draft picks and prospects; from a promising start to a search for a new executive to come in as a new President and GM of the Leafs to clean up the horrible mess.

Winning %: .428

Playoff Appearances: 1 for 2

Drafted: Felix Potvin, Yanic Perreault, Alexander Goodynyuk

Best Trade: Peter Zezel and Bob Rouse acquired for Al Iafrate

Worst Trade: Tom Kurvers acquired for a first round pick (Scott Niedermayer).

The Back Story

When Gord Stellick resigned in August of 1989, Harold Ballard offered the Leafs’ GM job to Frank Bonello, who was the GM of the Marlies Club that won the 1975 Memorial Cup. Ballard low-balled the salary offer to Bonello and the deal fell through. The very next morning, Ballard announced that former Leaf coach Floyd Smith was the Leafs' new GM.

Floyd Smith's team actually managed to put up a respectable record in his first year, going 38-38-4 (the Leafs first .500 season in more than a decade - since 1978-79). Toronto qualified for the post season, but were eliminated by the St. Louis Blues in five games (in the land before Internet, I remember lying on the floor of a dorm room in Ottawa doing everything I possibly could to try to maintain a static riddled, weak AM radio signal of that final Leafs' game. I can still hear the cry of "Momesso" when his slap shot from out near the redline eliminated put my beloved Toronto Maple Leafs down 3-0 in the series).

One of the most infamous bad trades in the history of the Leaf franchise went down on Smith's watch: a first round pick to New Jersey for Tom Kurvers. The deal was pulled off by Smith in the fall of 1989 when the Leafs were a mid-pack club. Neither the media, the fans or the club saw what was coming: in his second season as GM, the wheels completely fell off.

The 1990-91 season pretty much couldn’t have gone worse for the Leafs who flirted with last overall pretty much from day one. The team lost 13 of their first 16 games and Smith was ordered to revamp the roster. He would go on to make eight trades over the next nine weeks and while a few of the trades brought some pretty important talent to the club, the Leafs’ never recovered. I can remember seeing New Jersey Devil jerserys with Lindros’ 88 on the back.

The death of Harold Ballard led to a huge legal battle over the future of the franchise. Donald Giffin and Steve Stavro, the co-executors of Ballard’s estate, ended up in a protracted legal battle over the future of the Toronto Maple Leafs organization.

Giffin wanted to keep Smith on as GM and bring in one of John Ferguson Sr., Mike Nykoluk, or former Leafs GM Jim Gregory to run the hockey organization. Stavro was desperate to depose Floyd Smith and bring in a business person to oversee the Leafs; his first choice was Lyman MacInnis, who was the then-head of the Entertainment division of Labatt’s.

Ultimately, Steve Stavro won the court case, the decision allowed him to replace Giffin with a Chief Operating Officer who would turn out to be Cliff Fletcher.

The Good

The Leafs first .500 season in a decade made it seem like this team was finally on the right track.
Harold Ballard died.

A few key future Leafs acquired: Zezel, Rouse, Potvin...

The Bad

Better pull up a chair…

The Leafs started the 1989 season with three wins in their first 16 games and then started the 1990 calendar year by going winless in 10 (0-7-3).

The Leafs had actually collected a number of early draft picks most of whom were shipped out of town when Smith pulled off eight trades in November and December of 1990. In addition to the prospects, in a desperate attempt to right the ship, Smith also traded three of the four first round draft picks.

The Leafs goaltending tandem was Raycroftian. Alan Bester, who never returned to form after giving up the famous Sergio Momesso playoff goal, would find himself spending a portion of the year in the minors with the Newmarket Saints, while Peter Ing was clearly in over his head.

The Crazy

On the one-month anniversary of Smith's hiring, the ever classy Ballard told the media that he’d gladly hire a different GM if someone better came along.

With defenceman Todd Gill struggling, Brad Marsh returns to action after being a healthy scratch for two months, only to have coach Tom Watt decide the Leafs will go with a five-man defensive rotation.

With all of Smith’s wheeling and dealing, the 1990-91 Toronto Maple Leafs dressed a team record 48 players that season.

Prior to being traded, Al Iafrate went through a very messy, public divorce, a paternity suit in St. Louis and his teammate Gary Leeman began publicly dating Iafrate's ex-wife.

Smith would finally trade Tom Kurvers to Vancouver for Brian Bradley. Bradley was goaless in his first season with the Leafs, putting up 11 assists in 26 games as a Leaf. The following season, Bradley continued to struggle scoring goals, potting just 10 in 59 games. Eventually, Bradley would be traded to Tampa Bay where he threatened to break the fifty goal mark in his first year with the club and would eventually score 42 in his first go ‘round with the Lightning.

Floyd Smith thought so much of defenceman Brad Marsh (who couldn’t crack the Leafs line-up and was not protected when the Senators expansion draft occurred) that Smith planned to offer the Leafs coaching position to him.

Smith puts Cliff Fletcher’s name forward to the Board of Directors, he told the Toronto Star: "Sure I knew it would probably cost me my job, but I recommended very strongly that they hire Cliff Fletcher to run the show.”

On the patented DGB How bad was it? 100 point scale: 93 – Just like JFJ’s tenure, Floyd Smith’s Leafs qualified for the post-season in Smith’s first year and seemed to have things going their way. Board interference and an inability to stick to plan made Smith’s second year one of the most tumultuous in Leafs history. Picks and prospects were shipped out of town by the truckload; the dressing room saw some unparalleled conflicts and the starting goalie lost all confidence and ability. And once again, Cliff Fletcher was brought to town to help clean up the mess…

Luke Schenn

Got an email asking for an opinion on the Leafs keeping Luke Schenn up with the big club this year.

I have to say I really have no idea and I'd question anyone that has an ironclad opinion on any of this. Unless you're in charge of player development, how do you know what's right for each player? And if any blogger, journalist, member of the message board commentariat is so certain about what's right then I would advise them to polish up their CVs as there's huge demand with 28 or so NHL clubs for people that can identify NHL ready talent and the best path for development with that much certainty.

The men in the coaching offices and executive suites should be ideally placed and trained to have far more insight into this sort of things then a guy procrastinating in his office on a Monday afternoon, but then again, these are the same suits that signed Raycroft and Budaj to "anchor" the Avalanche nets, Jason Blake to a five year $20M deal and DiPietro to a 27 year three billion dollar contract, so there's certainly room to question the collective wisdom of sports executives.

In terms of precedence, I'm sure that for every success story of 18 year old d-men prospering (Stevens, Pronger) there's two or three times more busts, but that may be a bigger statement on the variables of drafting kids (how many 1st rounders turn out to be busts no matter where or how they're developed?) than it is an informed look at how to best develop NHL talent.

I guess I look at it this way:

If you were Ron Wilson, and you had his ego and his pride, and you had a diamond like Schenn would you want him to go back to junior to be coached by Ryan Huska or would you rather take a hands-on approach in helping him develop into a prime NHL defenceman?

If you were Cliff Fletcher, would you care about losing a single year of contract value in 2012 or '13. Most likely a season or two into a new collective bargaining agreement?

If you were a big-shot at MLSE and were focused maintaining profits and interest in your team, would you keep the young phenom in your line-up, or push to send him 4000Km west?

If you were Luke Schenn or his agent, where would you rather play?

If you were Matt Stajan (and we're going to go all the way back to 1980 for this tepid pop culture reference) would you want your bodyguard heading back to Kelowna while the Matt Dillon's of the league keep shaking you down for lunch money?

And I'm happy to see that the media coverage on this has shown the sports writers propensity for hard work, use of insider access and seeking out the ideal source by offering extensive quotes from the directors of player development at teams around the league, oh wait...

So there's my waffling - what's your take?

No Predictions, Low Expectations

Cross-posted from PPP where the fellas were kind enough to ask me for my thoughts on the coming season, instead I gave them this...

No predictions and low expectations. That pretty much sums up my take on the upcoming Leaf season.

This is a year where, with the exception of Nikolai Kulemin and Ron Wilson, the most intriguing story lines will occur away from the ice at the ACC: the development of Schenn and Pogge; the backroom deals struck to bring in more picks and prospects; the on-going (never ending) search for a President and GM; the build-up to the trade deadline; prepping for the 2009 draft; the ongoing efforts to untie JFJ's Gordian knot; and hopefully avoiding the thin (thin!) 2009 UFA pool.

In place of a guess at a win loss record or what odds the Leafs might have of making the post-season, I offer this instead...

What We Can Learn from Cliff Fletcher

The first thing most people remember about Cliff Fletcher’s original tenure with the Leafs: blockbuster trades.

This is the GM that brought the Leafs Doug Gilmour and Mats Sundin; two trades that, in an ideal world, would buy this GM all sorts of latitude from the media, stakeholders and the fans.
This being Toronto, his legendary work is often brought into question by two simple words: "draft schmaft" (proving the lasting value of mnemonics).

The next thing fans are likely to recall is Fletcher dismantling the team. As then-owner Steve Stavros’ grocery empire came crumbling down it necessitated a series of salary dumps and resulted in one of the more recent dark periods of Leaf history (who was a worse coach, Mike Murphy or Paul Maurice? Discuss).

Between the big trades and the eventual decline of this club, Fletcher demonstrated not just a keen understanding of how to build a team, but how to evaluate one.

Fletcher is the first GM I can recall who looked at his team in ten game increments and openly talked to the media about using ten game trends to identify strengths, weaknesses and patterns in his team's play. (This could very well be more a function of having a string of horrible front office staff in Toronto than it was Fletcher bringing something new to the game, the fans and the media. For all I know, Cecil Hart and the Habs were doing this with The Gazette and La Presse back in Chelios' rookie season in 1937).

Breaking the Pain Down into Ten Game Segments

Fletcher's approach back in the day is something we fans could learn from and need to apply to the coming season.

This year the focus should be on player development and team trends over ten to 20 game increments, not on who blew coverage on the PK, which player kicked a sock in anger and how to best quantify the greed of MLSE and the alleged concomitant stupidity of Leaf fans.
Looking at how the Leafs have performed since the lock-out, we fans can do ten games in our sleep. It's also a safe way to approach a year that is likely to set some sort of record for media hysterics.

Mittenstringers, Mouth Breathers and One-Fingered Typists

Despite being covered by one of the largest media corps in Canada, one certainty for the coming season is that we fans will be fed a steady diet of little more than who won, who scored, and who's to blame. The nutritional equivalent of a cheeseburger-in-a-can, quick, easy, and entirely beside the point.

Look for the mittenstringers to second guess every Leaf transaction and to contradict themselves over what's "best" for the team and the players while neglecting to notice that the bulk of the roster is made up of players for the times rather than players for all time. Let's face it, many of these skaters won’t even be wearing the beautiful blue and white leaf on their chest come March.

Considering the transitional nature of the roster, instead of running these players out of town or setting up effigies, I suggest that the Barilkosphere lead the way in looking at the bigger picture.

How much more black could this be? And the answer is none. None more black.

In public polling (or "research" as those in the trade like to call it, don’t know when it happened but it seems pollster has become a bad word) one of the most fundamental questions one can ask it the "right track/wrong track" question. And it’s a question we should likely be asking every ten games leading up to the trade deadline. Is this team on the right track or the wrong track? Are management’s player personnel decisions on the right track or the wrong track? Are Wilson's systems on the right track or wrong track? Is Pogge's development on the right track (65 starts) or the wrong track (benched for Clemmensen in the playoffs)? Are the Leafs acquiring picks and prospects (right track) or dealing second round picks for 15 games of Yanic Perreault (wrong track)?

Let's face it, it really doesn’t matter if the Leafs win 14 or 40 games this year. What matters is how management reacts to the results in the wins and losses column. Building a team that can eventually take a serious run at and challenge for the Cup has to be, must be, at the root of every decision management makes.

Right track or wrong track?

A simple question to keep top of mind for the upcoming season.

A simple question that will hopefully distract us from countless third period melt-downs, rookie errors, and a media contingent that takes obscene delight in the failures of the Leafs and questioning the loyalty of Leaf fans.

Cliff Fletcher's Asset Management

A look at Cliff Fletcher's transacations as GM of the Toronto Maple Leafs

Picks Acquired
2008 – 2nd (PIT for Gill)
2008 – 3rd (FLA for Kilger)
2008 – 5th (FLA for Belak)
2008 – 5th (PIT for Gill)

Picks Traded
2008 – 3rd (TOR) to NYI for Schenn
2008 – 3rd (FLA) to STL for Mayers
2008 – 5th (TOR) to MTL for Grabovski
2009 - 2nd (TOR) to NYI for Schenn
2009 - 5th (PIT) to NYR for Hollweg
2010 - 2nd (TOR) to MTL for Grabovski
2010 - 4th (TOR) to FLA for Mike Van Ryn

Net Picks traded
2nd
3rd
4th

Net Picks Gained
None

Toronto Maple Leaf Draft Picks Remaining

2009 NHL Draft
1st (TOR)
2nd NO PICK: (NYI for Schenn)
3rd (TOR)
4th NO PICK: (SJ for Toskala, traded by JFJ)
5th (TOR)
6th (TOR)
7th (TOR)

2010 NHL Draft
1st (TOR)
2nd NO PICK: (MTL for Grabovski)
3rd (TOR)
4th NO PICK: (FLA for Van Ryn)
5th (TOR)
6th (TOR)
7th (TOR)


UFAs
Niklas Hagman $3M/4yrs.
Jeff Finger $3.5M/4yrs.
Curtis Joseph $700K/1 yr.
Jonas Frogren (contact in dispute)
Josef Boumidienne (two-way deal)


Cap Implications

Tucker -$4.0M total ($1.0M/year until 2013 - if you have a baby this Leaf season, your child will be in Junior Kindergarten when this salary comes off the books)

Raycroft -$1.266M total ($533K in 2008-09; $733K in 2009-2010)

McCabe +$11.45M total ($2.85M in 2008-09 and 2009-10; $5.75M in 2010-11)


Cheap Editorializing

McCabe and a 4th for Van Ryn: apparently I'm one of three members of Leafs nation that doesn't like this deal. I'll let Alan Ryder 'splain why. (I also have a completely irrational fear that Van Ryn will get hurt 10 days before the trade deadline making him unmovable in 2009).

Tucker (waived) - Mayers (acquired for a 3rd round pick): an aging grinder, former PP sniper now in decline swapped out for an aging grinder PK specialist who's allegedly not in decline.

Wellwood (waived) - Grabovski (acquired for a 2nd and 5th round pick): a small, soft, unproven second line centre waived to make room for a small, soft unproven second line centre.

Belak (traded for a 5th) - Holwegg (acquired for 5th) - Meh. If Holwegg plays more than 35 games something is seriously amiss in the land of alleged young player development.

Something I Learned Today

The world always makes the assumption that the exposure of an error is identical with the discovery of the truth - that error and truth are simply opposite. They are nothing of the sort. What the world turns to, when it has been cured of one error, is usually simply another error, and maybe one worse than the first one. - H.L. Mencken

When it comes to going public with bad news, there are two types of organizations:

1. Those that deal with it in an open and transparent manner – Tylenol is the oft-cited prototype in this camp and, much more recently, Maple Leaf Meats have shown the merit of being open, honest and accountable.
2. Those who leak, bury or misdirect the news in an effort to control the message.

I’d say my beloved Toronto Maple Leafs usually fall into slot #2.

And what are some of the best tactics to get in front of a bad news story?

1. Release it late on the Friday of a long-weekend;
2. Release it when there’s a lot of other bad news in the system; and/or
3. Leak the bad news early and leak it often – by the time the news becomes official or confirmed, most people will have moved through the five stages of grief from anger to acceptance.

When it comes to the Bryan McCabe trade, the Leafs have gone for door number 3 like the RIAA going after a 12 year old with a USB drive full of Jonas Brothers mp3s and the outcome, strangely, seems to be acceptance.

What’s that Smell?

The first time I went to Kamloops I was visiting an old friend who had just gotten engaged.

Kamloops stunk. Figuratively and literally.

The town is essentially a bowl built around a pulp mill. The scent of reduced sulphurs permeates everything.

The first few days I was in town, I kept asking my friend how he could live in a place that, um, stank. I don't mean to be cruel, but everything was tinted with the malodorous combination of cabbage and rotten eggs.

But then a strange thing happened: the smell seemed to go away. I no longer spent my days with a crinkled nose and worried brow wondering how people live among such a paralyzing stink.

Except the smell never went away.

The town still stunk of the by-products of supplying the world with 477,000 tonnes of pulp related products.

I just lost my ability to detect the stench.

Scientists call this phenomena olfactory adaptation or olfactory fatigue. Our nervous systems are programmed to automatically desensitize to certain stimuli so that we are not overloaded. For example, our skin doesn't constantly sense our clothing and our noses eventually get used to the gagging stink of pulp.

By turning down a response to certain or constant stimuli our bodies are better able to recognize and respond to new stimuli/possible threats.

If you've made it this far and are still reading, you may be asking yourself what pulp products, bad odours and olfactory adaptation have to do with the Leafs.

Stick with me here...

In Leaf Land it's not Pulp, it’s the Stench of Failure

I wonder if maybe Leafs Nation is undergoing a massive case of olfactory adaptation.

That we've become so used to the smell in these parts that they don't notice it anymore.

Slam McCabe all you want. Link to the youtube compilation videos of his various gaffes. Mock his haircuts, goofy faces and penchant for taking dumb penalties.

Go ahead and cringe at the burden of his no-movement clause.

But then step back and look at the numbers.

Three out of the last five seasons, McCabe was among the top 10 in scoring by a defenseman; three times he finished in the top three for goals.

Believe it or not, McCabe placed third in Norris trophy voting in 2004 and ninth in 2006.

He cracked the taxi squad for the 2006 Canadian Olympic squad. Bitch and moan all you want that he wasn’t in the top six on that club, but to be on the Canadian Olympic team is to be among some pretty elite company.

Despite all of these accomplishments and accolades, McCabe’s no-movement clause has allegedly so diminished his value that the Leafs had to include a draft pick in order to complete the deal.

Bottom line: the return for a number 2 d-man, power play quarterback, who can log 20+ minutes a night, who has a history of finishing in the top 10 in scoring (and who occasionally scores in the wrong net) is nothing more than a 3-4 d-man who’s recovering from multiple wrist surgeries.

And the Leafs had to throw in a 4th round pick to get the deal done.

As Steve points out in his latest entry, and as I posted earlier this summer, the trade does nothing to solve the Leafs' log-jam on D where they're approaching the season with nine NHL caliber defencemen (10 if you think Schenn might get more than a cup of coffee with the big club).

Anyone that hasn't been living under a rock can tell you that the Leafs don't need more D; they don't need cap flexibility; they don't need to shed more draft picks.

And yet, that's what they get for a top pairing d-man.

The Toronto Maple Leafs: A Rich History of Horrible Asset Management

I cannot believe that I’m going to cite Damien Cox here, but he has a point (ick). The Leafs have moved a pretty big chunk of talent/assets off their roster in the last few years. Consider:

• Belfour
• Domi
• Tucker
• Wellwood
• Rask===>Raycroft (should have been ===>ECHL but for the Avs)
• McCabe

All gone for nothing more than Mike Van Ryn and a series of lingering cap hits.

If shedding all of those players for nothing weren't bad enough, Fletcher has spent even more assets to spackle over the same holes:

• Mayers for a third round pick
• Grabovski for a second round pick
• Schenn for a second and third round pick
• a Fourth round pick to kiss McCabe goodbye

Changing the Culture: Buying High and Selling Low

I understand that management is trying to change the so-called culture of this club.

They gassed the coach (could only talk a good game), waived Wellwood (uncommitted, soft); bought-out Tucker (washed-up, psychopathic) and bought-out Raycroft (glove hand not good enough for mite T-ball).

But I’d argue that the real cultural change is far more urgently needed in the executive corridors of MLSE than in the locker room.

When Fletcher first came back to the Leafs, it was with a real sense of confidence. I loved his candid approach to assessing the team. I loved the moves he made at the trade deadline. I thought PM had to go and Wilson was a pretty solid replacement.

And then things regressed back to the norm. This team has a long twisted tradition of buying high and selling low, a philosophy that, once again, has stained all of Fletcher’s moves this summer.

The Leafs' story remains too many assets out the door with too little to show for it.

And the McCabe trade is just one more deal where the Leafs come out on the losing end.

Fletcher said last Tuesday: "Trying to build a team can't be fast-tracked."

He may be right, but he's demonstrating that it sure can be chronically mismanaged.

Kubina Trade Window About to Close

The window to trade Pavel Kubina closes today (August 15).

After Kubina squashed a trade-deadline deal last February, I was positive Cliff Fletcher would deal him out of town faster than Jason Blake can ruin an odd man rush with a 40 foot wrist shot.

How sure was I that Kubina would be dealt?

I would have wagered some of my most prized posessions on it: the near-mint Rocky Saganiuk rookie card; my 7" 45 RPM of Meco's Theme from Close Encounters; or even my framed, autographed 8x10 photo of Margaret Colin as Claire McCarron.

With just a few hours to go until Kubina's trade window closes, I'm guessing it's a good thing I didn't place any bets...

McCabe to Florida?

With Kubina appearing to be staying put, the hot rumour has McCabe headed to Florida.

I just want to make sure I have this straight.

The Leafs have upwards of ten D-men on their roster and the alleged return for McCabe is D-man Mike VanRyn? Meaning that after the trade the Leafs will still have upwards of 10 NHL D-men fighting for seven or eight spots.

Great.

I have to believe the Leafs are going to get some other combination of prospects/picks/forwards back in any deal for McCabe, but then again when I first posted about possible trade destinations for McCabe on July 3, Florida was one of the first teams I ruled out...

For those of you so inclined to make up a better deal with the Panthers, Florida's roster with cap hits, can be found here. A list of Florida prospects is here.

I'll give even odds that if JFJ were re-appointed GM, he'd work hard to get Kilger back as the centerpiece to the trade.

New(ish) Leaf Blogs

I've been trying to keep the sidebar up to date, but it seems like the last few weeks have seen a bunch of new Leaf Blogs hit the ice.

If you write for one or if you know of one that isn't listed, please let me know and I'll update the blogroll. Thanks.

Maple Leafs: Are the Fans to Blame?

There’s an interesting cross-post up between Pension Plan Puppets and Down Goes Brown regarding an abominable article by Howard Berger (I’m not sending any traffic to the Bergermeister Meister Berger's blog so you’ll have to locate the article yourself. Hint: it’s really not worth giving him the page views).

Here’s the money quote from Working Class Howard:

“Leaf fanatics constantly bitch about the likes of Damien Cox and Steve Simmons, only to make them the most widely-read columnists in the city… The same Leaf zealots that call me a rotten bastard in e-mails are the first to wonder where my blog is if I skip a day.”

I don’t know what’s happened to Howard, if it was the Avery Cancer thing, his having to buy a ticket to a Cowboys game with his own money while the team he covers for a living – the horrible terrible no good loosing Leafs, millionaires all of ‘em, were treated to a luxury box or if the rise of user-created content, such as blogs and message boards, has resulted in an increased scrutiny that’s too much for the error-prone radio man to bear.

No matter the cause, someone has poisoned the water in poor Howard’s well.

It’s the Love of the Team, Stupid.

Howard's certainly right in that there is an insatiable demand for all things Leaf. And he’s also right in that it’s Leaf fans that make Cox and Simmons two of the most read columnists in Canada.

Where he’s wrong is in implying that the likes of Simmons, Cox and McCown are the most read/watched/listened to because of any special skills or abilities or even their penchant to stir the pot.

These guys are widely read because they file on the Leafs.

Full stop.

If it was Cox and not the content that pulled in readership, his Wimbledon columns would be among the most read at the Star. But when he files on tennis or the Argos you can hear the crickets chirping between his paragraphs.

If it was Berger and not the leafs that drove the numbers, Howard could blog about Montreal limousine companies day and night and still get 200 comments a post.

It's a tough question, but where would Berger be without the Leafs?

Turning the Sites on the Fans

This is where it gets a little tricky.

It was one thing when the mediots went after Ballard, Stavro or MLSE – targets that were (and are) clearly worthy of media scorn - from Ballard’s personal vendettas to Stavro’s cash crunch dismantling of the team to MLSE’s alleged meddling and hiring of JFJ (ugh).

But it’s another thing entirely to go after Leaf fans.

Let’s be clear about this.

The fans have nothing to do with how sports teams ultimately perform (Coyotes, Predators, Capitals, Black Hawks, Islanders and hell, even Jays fans, are staying away in droves. How’s that working out for them? How many Championships have they lined up in the past decade or two?)

The fans don’t make bad trades for questionable goaltending.

The fans don’t decide who gets top minutes on the PK.

The fans don’t sit at the draft table or have input into player development.

And the fans don’t have much of a say in how the media covers the team.

As far as I know, Leaf fans also don’t have editorial positions at any of the major media outlets in this country.

The fans don’t write the articles and columns praising the team when it goes on a middling win streak and the same fans don’t write the columns and articles claiming the sky is falling when the Leafs go on their annual losing streak each January/February.

The fans don’t program the radio stations around call-in shows.

The fans don’t file blog posts based on emails read after a weekend away in Niagara (nice job, Howie).

There’s a great quote from political circles: “Any party that takes credit for the rain, ought to be prepared to be blamed for the drought.”

When the Leafs finally win a cup (and odds are that they will – eventually, maybe not for 100 years, but eventually) will the media let Leaf fans take the credit after decades of blame?

I doubt it.

Re-shaping the Leafs Media Environment

Howie’s bizarre-o world rant brings to mind the whole issue of information dissemination in this age of blogs, discussion boards, media convergence and really good artisanal salami (sorry, my mind drifted there back to my brief holiday in Seattle).

Given the craptacular job done by most of the media contingent following the Leafs, you'd think that fans would be flocking to the official leafs site. They may be, but the blogs I read aren't, I'm not, and I've never had a water-cooler conversation where someone referenced the Leafs web-page (Cox, Simmons and Berger - yes; TorontoMapleLeafs.com - no).

So, in the spirit of Berger’s odd-post, my rather boring communications consulting day job and the fact that no one I know, including MLSE, is properly using the Leafs web-page, here are ten ways the Leafs could revamp LeafsTV, update their web-presence and easily provide more viable, unfiltered and interesting alternative information for their fans and reduce/supplant the role of the increasingly adversarial, cranky and ineffective media:

1. Continue to post unedited news conferences in their entirety (yes, even the inane media questions) on the Leafs Web-site.
   
2. Increase the amount of first-person reporting on Leafs-TV and cross-post it to mapleleafs.com. Why not a weekly (or better yet, every other day) news interview with one of Fletcher, Jackson, Nieuwendyk, Gilmour, scouts, new players, coaches, assistant coaches, capologists, trainers, equipment managers – you name it (Steve Paikan is a big Leafs fan and a great interviewer – let’s give him the part-time gig).
   
3. Conduct more round-table discussions on Leaf topics with players, coaches, reporters, authors and hockey “experts” to be carried on Leafs TV and cross-posted to mapleleafs.com
   
4. Revamp the “Leafs Insider” newsletter to provide balanced informed insightful content and strive to make it more timely (the Leafs dealt for Hollweg and announced their intention to add two more players yesterday, yet I’ve got nothing from my Leafs Insider email newsletter. Nada. Zilch.)
   
5. Cancel the “Leafs Nation” magazine and put the resources into real-time electronic coverage of the team (was anyone out there aware of this magazine? Any of you ever read it?) News cycles are way too short for a long-lead magazine to be relevant or of interest to today’s fans (case in point: you can read about Paul Maurice and get tips from Kyle Wellwood in the latest issue - for those who are interested, Mr. Wellwood's advice is on how to take a pass, not the secrets of a successful all-you-can-eat buffet).
   
6. Get rid of the cronies. Want better coverage on Leafs TV? Fire/ reduce the number of former Leaf players/ barbie-like hostesses and add more insightful/ neutral commentators.
   
7. Hire better bloggers. This is what MLSE is offering fans? Really? That's an official TML blog? Cripes. Has no one at MLSE read Mirtle, MC79, Behind the Net, Fire Joe Morgan, Basketball Jones, Pensblog, etc.
   
8. Take advantage of digital media and make it entertaining. These guys have got it figured out – why can’t MLSE do something like this at the prospect camp? Who wouldn't want to see Luke Schenn take on Kulemin at Jenga or Hungry Hungry Hippos?
   
9. MLSE should be considering the power of Open Data Exchange - opening, hosting and reflecting (and very carefully filtering/refining) the flow of Leafs information that's out there. To wit: "“The winners won’t be those that control the most data — the winners will be those that channel the most data — and those that create the most value on top of the data flow.”
   
10. Quietly seek extraordinary rendition for any writer, blogger, copy desk editor that uses a plan the parade joke.

Hollweg: A 5th round pick for a 4th line guy

The Leafs acquired Ryan Hollweg from the New York Rangers in exchange for Pittsburgh’s 2009 fifth round pick (picked up by the Leafs in the Hal Gill trade).

Hollweg is best known for being Chris Simon’s piñata (Madres de Dios - sin dulce!) an incident that led to the longest suspension in the history of the NHL.

An RFA at the end of the season, Hollweg was 23rd in the NHL in hits last season, an impressive stat considering he only logged about twelve shifts or 8 minutes of ice a night for the Rangers.

I have to say, I haven’t been this excited about a transaction since the Leafs signed UFA Mike Blaisdell in 1987.

I’m sorry, did I say excited? I meant bored.

I think, "Meh" is the word I'm looking for here.

The acquisition puts the Leafs well over the 23 man NHL roster limit (and gives them about 10 guys ideally suited to 4th line duty).

Incredibly, Fletcher told 640AM that he’d like to add yet another forward (hopefully, someone who can play on at least the 3rd line) and one more D-man.

Given the number of players on the current roster, there’s not much use in calculating the Leaf’s salary cap as clearly quite a few players and their salary dollars are headed out of town.

That said, here’s the current Leafs Roster, listed alphabetically, with each player’s cap hit (taken from NHLNumbers. Oh, and if you’re doing any math, don’t forget to factor in Raycroft’s and Tucker’s buy-out.)

Forwards
1. Alex Steen ($1.7M)
2. Alexei Ponikarovsky ($2.105M)
3. Boyd Devereaux ($575K)
4. Dominic Moore ($700K)
5. Jamal Mayers ($1.33M)
6. Jason Blake ($4M)
7. Jiri Tlusty ($855K)
8. Mark Bell ($2.167M)
9. Matt Stajan ($1.75M)
10. Mikhail Grabovski ($850)
11. Nik Antropov ($2.05M)
12. Niklas Hagman ($3M)
13. Nikolai Kulemin ($1.48M)
14. Ryan Hollweg ($512K)

Likely to the Marlies:
15. Bates Battaglia
16. Brent Aubin
17. Darryl Boyce
18. Jeremy Williams
19. John Mitchell
20. Kris Newbury
21. Robbie Earl

Defence
1. Anton Stralman ($732K)
2. Bryan McCabe ($5.75M)
3. Carlo Colaiacovo ($1.283M)
4. Ian White ($850K)
5. Jeff Finger ($3M)
6. Jonas Frogen (TBD)
7. Pavel Kubina ($5M)
8. Staffan Kronwall ($487.5)
9. Tomas Kaberle ($4.25M)
10. Luke Schenn (TBD)


Goal
1. Vesa Toskala ($4M)
2. Curtis Joseph ($700K)

3. Justin Pogge ($616K)

Maple Leafs: Time to Face the Music

This morning at breakfast the iPod wasn't charged and I was too slow getting to the radio so I got stuck listening to some really bad music.

As Drive My Soul played in the background (gack!) it struck me that if the Toronto Maple Leafs really want to change their culture, if they really want a fresh start in 2008-'09, a public execution of the MLSE employee in charge of the in-game music programming at the ACC is as good a first step as any. (And how perfect would it be if it turned out Peddie or Tannenbaum was the one that picked Enter Sandman for the Leafs to skate out to?)

Is there anyone out there who thinks the Leafs need to play three Metallica songs each and every night? Does anyone at the game think Marilyn Manson, Bay City Rollers and Wolfmother=hockey? And does Zombie Nation's Kernkraft 400 really say "Toronto Maple Leafs score!" or does it just say: "I could be at any sporting event at any arena in North America."

As an aside, if Stephen Harper really wants a majority government I think the perfect way to harvest support in vote-rich Ontario is to formally ban The Final Countdown (with a full exemption for magicians) and then move on to Cotton Eyed Joe.

Maybe the Leafs need to take a page out of the Jays' playbook (as long as it's not the "missing the playoffs for 15 years" one) and have each Leaf pick their equivalent of the Jays at-bat music. When that Leaf scores, the ACC would play his tune.

The good: seeing the reaction to a Boyd Devereuax goal when one of the artists on his record label get some prime time play down at the ACC.

The bad: about six to eight times a year, we'd see Jason Blake first pump to something like Slowride by Foghat and odds are one of Poni, Grabovski or Antropov would pick Dragostea Din Tei (aka the Numa Numa dance) for their song...(You just know Stajan would pick some emo number and if Steen went with Abba, I'd trade him).

As someone who hasn't bought a new release since M. Ward's Post-War in 2006, I may not be ideally positioned to suggest an alternate play list for Maple Leaf games at the ACC, but anything (anything!) has to be better than the gratuitous use of Nickel Back, Def Leppard, and Linkin Park...

A Man Called Bryan

With 10 potential NHL ready players on the blue line, and prospect Luke Schenn as the only waiver exempt defenceman, it’s clear that the Leafs are going to have to make a few moves to get down to the seven D-men they plan on carrying during the regular season.

I’m hoping the Leafs don’t give Schenn any more than the standard nine game look-see before sending him back down to junior, which would put the Leafs down to nine D.

Given the Leafs recent move towards players with more size and grit, I wouldn’t be surprised to see Ian White moved, which would put the team at eight defenders.

That leaves Kubina and/or McCabe on the trading block.

Cliff Fletcher and Ron Wilson have both openly stated that McCabe is not in the team’s plans for the upcoming season. McCabe, despite his no movement clause (NMC), is clearly the more likely of the two D-men to be moved.

Timing

If it’s Kubina that’s going to be shipped out of town, the Leafs have a rather limited window to make it happen. Kubina’s contract permits the Leafs to trade him only between July 1 and August 15. After that, Kubina’s no trade clause kicks in, effectively pulling Kubina out of the trade market.

McCabe is due to receive a $2M bonus in September (his salary for this season is $4.15M+$2M bonus for $6.15 while his cap hit is $5.75M). I would presume that most teams would be far more inclined to deal for McCabe once that bonus has been paid by the fine fellows at MLSE.

Cap Hits, Chemistry and Conferences

If moving McCabe with his NMC wasn’t challenging enough, once you start to look at the cap situation across the league, it quickly reduces the number of possible trading partners for the Leafs.

So who’s a good trade destination for McCabe?

Several teams are either over the cap or so close to it they likely can’t take on McCabe’s $5.75 M cap hit. Cap issues pretty much rule out: Anaheim, Boston, Calgary, Chicago, Dallas, Detroit, Montreal, New Jersey, New York Rangers, Philadelphia, Pittsburgh, and Tampa Bay.

Nashville, Phoenix and St. Louis have the extra cap space but are likely too constrained by team budget issues to take on McCabe’s $4.15M salary.

Sure, the Leafs could take back hefty salary in return, but it would have to pretty much be a dollar for dollar trade with any of these clubs, and given the log jam on D that precipitated this deal it would have to be a big-money forward. It’s difficult enough to find a trade partner never mind trying to balance out the salaries going each way, so I don’t think this is going to happen (but I could be way way off on this one).

McCabe’s rather free-wheeling style probably eliminates Minnesota and Florida outright too.

That’s 17 teams out of contention. (Of course, having said that on the record, the Leafs will definitely trade McCabe to one of these teams).

Then there’s the whole issue of location. McCabe has some personal/home life issues that have led many to conclude that he would only accept a trade to a team in the Northeastern United States.

Teams with cap space, but a west coast bias, include Colorado (still need to re-sign Sakic), Columbus, Edmonton, Los Angeles, San Jose and Vancouver.

Colorado already has seven pretty solid NHL d-men under contract.

Columbus just acquired Commodore, Tyutin and Backstrom and, despite signing Huselius, still need help upfront.

The Sharks have plenty of cap room, but having picked up UFA Rob Blake and dealt for Dan Boyle so there’s not much room there.

Similarly, with Visnovsky and Souray under contract in Edmonton there’s little to no chance a deal for McCabe is going to happen with the Oil.

That makes it 21 unlikely to make a deal.

So What’s Left?

Given McCabe’s alleged preference is to play close to home that leaves just six teams in the east as potential trading partners, two of which are division rivals.

East

Atlanta
With just five d-men under contract, the Thrashers still need to sign a few more blue liners. They have lots of cap space and could really use the PP help that McCabe could bring. The challenge will be finding the right return for McCabe as the Thrashers are rather thin upfront and don’t have the greatest prospect pool. It’s also not clear that McCabe would accept a move that far south.

Buffalo
The Sabres have just six d-men under contract for 2008-09 (having traded Campbell at the deadline and losing Kalinin as a UFA to the Rangers). Rumour has it that Sabres GM Darcy Regier has contacted 40 year old former Sabres D-man Teppo Numminen about a possible return (yikes) so there might just be an opening for McCabe (who has a knack for scoring last second game winning goals for the Sabres).

While the Sabres do have lots of young players to possibly complete a deal with the Leafs, they may have budget issues that are too large to take on McCabe’s cap hit. The Sabres have already committed $42M in salaries and they still have to qualify Bernier and Paille.

Furthermore, McCabe’s multi-year deal might also interfere with the Sabres’ ability to sign a slew of key players who are slated to become UFAs and RFAs in 2009-2010.

Carolina
The Canes do have about $9M in existing cap space. Unfortunately, they already have eight D-men under contract including PP guys Corvo and Pitkanen. The Hurricanes and Leafs do have a history as trading partners, but I have a hard time seeing McCabe squeezing into the Canes blueline or under their buget.

Islanders
The fish sticks have just six D-men under contract, but more importantly, the club has only 9F signed. There may be lots of cap space in Nassau County but most of it is going to be directed to finding another handful of forwards.

There is no doubt the Isles could use some help on their moribund PP; however, GM Garth Snow is on the record as saying he wants a pick from the Leafs in return for taking on McCabe’s contract. If that’s the opening bargaining position, I’m not sure where or how you even start to build a counter offer (how about a lower draft pick?)

Ottawa
With Redden signing in the big apple and Commodore heading out west, there is a roster spot or two open on D in the city that fun forgot (or to be more precise, in the suburbs of the city that fun forgot). The Sens do have cap room, but rumours of Boyle to the Sens might preclude a McCabe deal. I don’t see this one happening, but then again Raycroft got an NHL contract so anything is possible…

Washington
The Capitals have about $8M in cap space, but I have no idea if their budget permits them to hit the cap max. They also need to sign four RFAs to new deals and already have 7 D under contract. The Caps do have a number of young forwards and prospects that the Leafs could ask for in return for McCabe and Washington isn’t too far from the McCabe’s Long Island HQ. I wonder if Fletcher and McPhee have much of a history together…

West

Out west there appear to be just two options…

Los Angeles Kings
The team has just four D-men under contract and a whopping $28M in available cap space. Their PP quarterback Rob Blake was just signed by San Jose so there is an opening for a guy like McCabe.

As previously noted, the Kings are likely 4,000 km too far west for McCabe. The Kings are also without a coach at the moment (can you imagine the sh*tstorm in the Toronto media if the Leafs didn’t have a coach during free agency season?) which might make it a tad more difficult to talk McCabe and his agent Pulver into agreeing to a deal here. Still, it is an option.

Vancouver
The team has the cap space and the desperate need for offence that makes them a pretty good potential trade partner for the Leafs. They also need to add at least one more D-man to their roster, so they do have a vacancy on the blueline.

Having lost Markus Naslund and being such an offensively challenged club, I’m not sure they have the depth at forward to swing a deal with the Leafs. Moreover, as noted with the LA Kings, you can’t get much further away from Long Island and Toronto than Vancouver…

Life of Bryan

It’s hard to believe, but McCabe is just one season removed from being one of the top offensive defencemen in the league and two seasons removed from being an Olympian who actually got Norris trophy consideration.

Injury troubles certainly got the best of him last year and it can’t be a picnic being the whipping boy of the Toronto media (has any other athlete been called out as much by the press in this city? Has any paper ever demanded a player be traded on the front page of their paper?) but McCabe has handled all of this pressure with class.

Recent statements from Fletcher and Wilson have left little room for doubt that it’s time for McCabe to move on.

The $5.75 million dollar question is: where?

Back from Holiday Edition: What did I miss?

As the four or five of you who read this blog know, I took a quick holiday to the west coast for two weeks. I ended up without an internet connection during my time on Vancouver Island and came back to the news of the Wellwood, Tucker and Raycroft moves (and a new found appreciation of just how much time I spend attached to the interwebs).

The Raycroft move is about 10 months too late and about as exciting as stale vanilla pudding.

As I wrote here 18 months ago, extending Tucker was one of JFJ's many blunders, giving him a NMC was unconscionable.

A train wreck at ES, useless on the PK and of declining powers on the PP, I'm fine seeing the back of #16. Before we get to Wellwood, I'll just pause here to await all the angry blog entries on how Tucker's refusal to waive his NMC has hurt the Leafs rebuilding efforts and saddled the club with a six-year cap hit...ok, um, well, moving on...

Wellwood's move to Vancouver is good news for Whitespot franchises in the lower mainland, sports hernia surgeons and the Sedin sisters. Leafs Nation can now sit back and wonder if Wellwood will be this decade's Steve Sullivan: a small forward who puts up big points in the regular season, turns invisible in the playoffs and routinely cited by the media as further evidence of Pat Quinn's MLSE's malfeasance.

Free Agency (not so Free)
I'm guest-hosting over at PPP today and unlike my fellow co-hosts Greener and Chemmy, I like what the Leafs have done with their UFA signings so far.

As rumoured just about everywhere, the Leafs inked Curtis "Methuselah" Joseph to a one-year $700K contract.

It's not a blockbuster/showstopper/wow sort of signing, but it buys Pogge one more year in the minors, gives the Leafs some cap space and keeps Peddie and Tannenbaum happy as it will sell lots of jerseys. (Look for the Leafs marketing department to squeeze every promotional once out of this signing and look for Curtis Joseph's massive eyebrows to be gracing all things Leaf).

Joseph put up a sv % of .906 to Raycroft's .876 (no, that's not a typo) and a GAA of 2.55 to Raycroft's 3.92. If Cujo can put up similar numbers in spot duty to Toskala, he will be a much welcome presence.

In terms of the cap, Raycroft's buyout of $533,000 and Cujo's bottom-dollar $700K salary combines for a paltry $1.233M cap hit for backup goaltending. Remarkably, that's one million fewer dollars than MLSE paid Raycroft to sleep on the bench (and sleep through the few portions of the games he played) last year. A nice savings and a nice change of pace...

The Leafs second signing of the day is a bit more contentious. The Leafs signed Jeff Finger to a 4 year, $14M deal that carries a $3.5M annual cap hit.

Finger is a D-man I was really hoping the Leafs would sign (albeit for $2M per year).

He finished the season playing on the top defensive pair in Colorado and is an ideal #3 or 4 guy: great at ES, eats about 20 minutes of ice a night, can hit, blocks shots, is big and tough and has a good right-handed shot from the point.

He may not have played 100 NHL games yet, but he led the Avalanche in on/ice v. off/ice +/-, GF60 and was second in GA60. To put up those stats playing 20 minutes a night makes me a happy man.

Did the Leafs massively overpay? Yes. By a good million to $1.5 million a year (UFAs are always overpaid. It's a sellers market)

Does it matter? No, not with the cap growing to $57M this year. MLSE has piles of money, if the kid doesn't work out MLSE can bury that contract in the minors.

The Leafs ended the day signing former Dallas Stars winger Niklas Hagman to a four year $12M deal that carries a $3M annual cap hit.

Another deal that's a-ok by me.

Hagman has missed fewer games since 2001 than Cola has played (well, maybe not, but it's close). He can play either wing and put up 27 goals last year, including 4 SH markers and 8 game winning goals (leading the Stars in that category). That's solid production for a guy getting 15 minutes of ice per game. He's also only 28 years old.

By my (very poor) math, the team has $9.5(ish) million in cap space at the moment.

That said, Cliff Fletcher told Bill Watters that Bryan McCabe is not in the Leafs' plans for next year. So call it $14.5M in cap space.

Fletcher told Howard Berger that the team would like to add another forward and at least one more defenceman (an unsigned Euro that hasn't played in the NHL - any guesses as to who that might be?) so it should be an interesting few months as the Leafs continue to change the face of their organization.

Shared a pack of lies for lunch

I'm on a west-coast vacation until July 1.

Instead of my usual routine for avoiding work and procrastinating at the office, I'm riding monorails, taking ferries and going to baseball games. As a result, I'm four-thousand kilometers and three hours further disconnected from Leaf news than usual.

All of this is to say, I likely won't be posting anything on the Leafs' efforts at the draft, any upcoming trades and other manoeuvres. (Having read Gare Joyce's Future Greats and Heartbreaks, I'd also advise any Leaf fan out there to take draft day analysis from the usual suspects with a big chunk of salt)

###

Not sure what to make of the Jamal Myers deal. He should bring some much needed toughness and some skill on the PK - two areas the Leafs have been rather, ahem, short on.

On the surface, given all the talk of restructuring, youth movements and re-building, a third round pick sounds a bit high. But according to this site, a 3rd round pick has about a 12% chance of playing 200 games in the NHL. Mayers will be two-thirds of the way to that total with the Leafs when his existing deal runs out.

At 33 and a bottom six forward, there's no point in getting worked up over such a minor deal (it's no second rounder for 15 games of Yanic Perreault) at best, I'm hoping this is but one piece of the bigger picture and am willing to take a wait and see...

I Got Sixteen Days, Got a Bible and a Rosary

Three quick(ish) points today:

1. The Interim-GM Title: Why all the confusion?

Is anyone else really sick and tired of the media’s hang-up on Fletcher’s interim title?

Was there this much hand-wringing and bloviating (Hockey News I’m looking at you!) when Flyer’s Interim-GM Paul Holmgren signed Mike Knuble and Sami Kapanen to contract extensions? Were the columnists in Philly and at the National outlets worried about the impact of trading Peter Forsberg?

To keep it more local, did Feschuk or Smith have an aneurysm when Embry dealt Jalen Rose, a 2006 first-round pick and an undisclosed amount of cash for Antonio Davis? Or when Embry unloaded Aaron Williams for a second round pick?

Was anyone concerned that the incoming President and GM of the Raptors or the Flyers might not approved of these decisions that were made by their interim predecessors?

I thought not.

So why all the concern about Fletcher? Why all the columns about the "circus" down at MLSE?

Not that the media would ever lower themselves to read a blog (they’re far more interested in telling people what Leaf fans think than they are in engaging in any sort of dialogue with said fan base) but if any of them should happen to swing by this lowly spot, I’ll make it easy:

Like Embry and Holmgren, Cliff Fletcher is an interim GM. Fletcher has a 19th month contract with MLSE. Until the organization is able to hire the President/GM of their choice to run my beloved Toronto Maple Leafs, Fletcher is the GM and has the power and authority to make whatever moves he sees fit to improve this club.

It’s not complicated…

2. Twenty-seven days or less...

The biggest hockey decisions facing the Leafs will be over and done with in less than a month, twenty seven days at the outside to be precise.

June 15 to June 30: Window for buy-outs
June 20: Pavel Kubina’s trade window opens
June 20-21: Amateur Draft
June 25: Deadline to tender qualifying offer to RFAs
June 26: Negotiations with other teams’ RFAs permitted
June 30: Setting of Salary Cap upper and lower limits
July 1: Free agency begins for RFAs and UFAs (the heavies will be gone by July 7)

When you consider that Fletcher first contacted Wilson on May 27 and it took just under two weeks to get Wilson’s name on a contract, even if the Leafs started negotiations with a GM yesterday the earliest they could likely sign a contract is June 23 - two-days after the entry draft.

And if they did hire a new GM in that time frame, he would have all of two days to issue offers to the Leafs' RFAs, a week to conclude any buy-outs, and eight days to prep for the UFA/RFA silly-season.

Media hand-wringing aside, one look at the calendar - and the reality of the time involved in executive recruitment – makes it pretty clear that Fletcher and his team will be the ones driving the bus through the most important part of the off-season.

3. MLSE low-balled Wilson and other great media insights

I Love that MLSE is putting their news conferences up on the Leafs web-site. The sooner they can figure out a way to disintermediate the media the better.

For those of you who would rather hear from Wilson and Fletcher first hand (instead of say, hearing their comments, answers and thoughts through media filters that brought us such great insights as the Avery cancer slur, the MLSE low-balling Wilson with a $600K contract offer, and Mats signing with Montreal) the media conference is available in three parts at the Leafs web site.

On Tuesday night I was chatting with one of the reporters who covered the event and he said Wilson spoke for 3+ hours and was very accommodating with the media. He also said Wilson was an astounding story teller…we’ll see if that relationship is as cozy when the Leafs have dropped seven in a row next February and the high water mark of media analysis is Simmons wondering what ever happened to Walt McKechnie…

Coach Wilson?

Ron Wilson has apparently been hired as the 27th coach of the Toronto Maple Leafs. My immediate reaction: should be an interesting three years before he gets fired.

The Coverage (pick your poison)

Sean at Down Goes Brown
CBC
The Globe and Mail
The National Post
The Toronto Star
The Toronto Sun
TSN
or just Google News it

The Plan

Anyone who thinks the Leafs aren’t operating with a plan hasn’t been paying attention (no, not the JFJ plan that changed every 15 minutes – the Cliff Fletcher Plan).

Now, whether or not this is a wise plan is another matter altogether…but all circumstantial evidence is certainly pointing at Brian Burke being the next GM of the Toronto Maple Leafs.

Consider:

GM candidates not interviewed? A veritable who’s who of hockey men.

GM candidates interviewed? Just one: Dave Nonis, a former employee and alleged best pal of one Brian Burke.

Coaching candidates interviewed? Just one: Ron Wilson, a man who credits Brian Burke as having the most profound impact on his hockey career (Oh, and Burke is Godfather to Wilson’s daughter).

Clearly the traditional sequencing is off (hire GM, let GM hire coach) but it certainly looks like Fletcher is clearing the decks for Burke, whether it be this year – when’s he still under contract to Anaheim - or when Burke’s contract expires (2011?).

The Hire

I think Ron Wilson is a dick (top-drawer insight and analysis there, eh?)

Beyond that, I have no idea how good of a coach he might be. Furthermore, where did nice-guy good-quote Maurice get the Leafs?

Wilson appears to be a significant upgrade over Paul Maurice, especially when you consider their respective winning percentages and the rate at which their teams have qualified for the post-season. (One of my main concerns with Maurice when he was hired was how infrequently his clubs made the playoffs. He'll be a perfect fit in Florida.)

	Ron Wilson	Paul Maurice
Winning Percentage	.543	.492
Playoffs	8 for 14	3 for 11

The difference between the two coaches becomes even more apparent when you compare special teams (The Leafs went from the #1 PP under Pat Quinn's final year to 16th and 15th under Paul Maurice).

	Ron Wilson	Paul Maurice
2008 PK	1st	29th
2008PP	10th	15th
2007 PK	14th	27th
2007 PP	2nd	16th

The Pedigree

Wilson coached the Washington Capitals to the Cup finals in 1998 and also won the ugliest trophy in the history of hockey.

His teams in San Jose have been charged with underacheiving. The last few years the Sharks have been among the Stanley Cup favourites but have been eliminated in the Conference Semis every year since the lockout.

As for the complaint that Wilson hasn’t won the big prize, the number of Stanley Cup winning coaches looking for work comes in at a grand total of two: Bob Hartley and Pat Burns.

Hartley was fired after winning the Cup in Colorado and did nothing in Atlanta (I'd rather the Leafs be coached by Tom Watt, ok maybe not).

I’m not sure of Burns’ health status or if the Devils would be willing to even let him interview with the Leafs (not sure what MLSE has done to their NHL brethren, but getting access to other teams’ staff hasn’t gone so well).

Yeah, there is a third Stanley Cup winning coach out there in Larry Robinson, but I suspect he’s not in the market to be a head coach given his history of demoting himself.

(Unless I’m completely mis-reading things and the critics that are looking for a more storied resume are willing to roll the dice with Terry Crisp or Jacques Demers…)

The Alternate(s)

I think John Anderson could have been a very intriguing candidate, especially given his Toronto roots (and the potential to restore his burger empire to its rightful place at the top of the burger world).

Anderson has been to the AHL finals three times in the past seven years and six times in the past eleven seasons. But the political reality down at the ACC (and JFJ’s legacy) is such that I don’t think this organization can risk going with a rookie GM or coach for some years to come.

The Goofy Asides

For anyone that wants to complain about the timing of this announcement drawing any attention away from the Stanley Cup, I have one question: did the Leafs release a statement on Ron Wilson? Was there an official news release? Did MLSE book a media conference? Um, no, no and no.

The media broke this story and if they were really concerned with the sanctity of the Stanley Cup game or of not overshadowing the Penguins and Wings they would have sat on this story (odds of that happening are similar to me winning the Conn Smythe. Oh, I should add: I'm not a strong skater).

Pure Imagination

Damien Cox has filed yet another blog post that I just can't ignore. Just like those Devilishly tasty and tempting peanut M&M's - I just can't say no to the horribly written tripe that man generates.

Speaking of chocolates, is it just me or does Cox's "blog" The Spin conjure up a little Roald Dahl:

We'll begin, with a spin
Traveling in the world of my creation
What we'll see will defy explanation....

Ok, maybe it's just me...With that out of the way, here's the latest bit of pure imagination from Cox:

It seems virtually certain that the NHL season and playoffs will end, and the Maple Leafs will still be without a new Great Helmsmen.

Isn't this pretty much in keeping with the time lines identified throughout this process by MLSE? As such, is it really news? Not to be slowed by the lack of a lead, hook, or anything approaching interesting, Cox ploughs on:

Ask them and they'd tell you that doesn't matter, that they already have fabulous people in place to make all the necessary decisions. Of course, if that were the case, why would they be looking to hire people?

Wouldn't it be freakin' great if Cox actually picked up the phone and asked Richard Peddie or Cliff Fletcher his questions and then printed their actual responses instead of just imagining what their reply would be?

Can you imagine how refreshing it might be for a journalist to use their much vaunted access and professional training to bring the general fan some news?

Me either. And to quote Han Solo, "I can imagine quite a bit"

Cox says of my beloved leafs and their pursuit of a new President/GM:

Meanwhile, the rest of the hockey world snickers.

Ouch.

Oh Wait. Is this the same world that extended Jacques Martin’s contract, employed Doug MacLean and Mike Milbury, sent a huge offer sheet to Dustin Penner, paid Bobby Holik $9 million a year, refuses to move to no-touch icing, has a disciplinary program that’s about as consistent and logical as my two-year old son, and is embroiled in over-lapping law suits over Todd Bertuzzi?

That world?

Snicker away boys…

Wait, those of you who want to snicker should know that Cox has more, lots more:

Increasingly, the Leafs seem to be settling on a curious plan that will see Cliff Fletcher remain in charge until Brian Burke shakes free of Anaheim, whether that's next month or next year. In the meantime, the Leafs are attempting to lure good hockey men with obscure promises of jobs with no authority under Fletcher.

That's what they were offering former Vancouver GM Dave Nonis, and likely what they plan to throw at ex-Dallas GM Doug Armstrong when he comes to Toronto to meet with the Leaf brass this week.

“Obscure promises” “no authority” – according to whom? Where’s the source? Can we get a quote over here? Maybe even a third party? Anything to get me out of this world of pure imagination...

At least they were successful in getting permission from the Stars to talk to Armstrong, but that would be because owner Tom Hicks would love to get out from under the three years he still owes his former GM.

When the Leaf succeed - it's not of their doing; when they fail - it's all their fault.

See how this works?

If the Leafs ever win the cup (I'm thinking 2067 is our year) it will be because of the other teams' failures.

Unfortunately, Cox has more:

With those three years, of course, Armstrong can afford to be picky and why in the world would he accept anything less than full GM powers from a lousy team like the Leafs, particularly since his resume for the past decade is much more impressive than Fletcher's? Moreover, if the rumours in the hockey world yesterday were correct, the St. Louis Blues may beat the Leafs to the punch and offer Armstrong a job as GM-in-waiting as early as today.

Think about it. Would you rather work with John Davidson, Al MacInnis, Larry Pleau and Andy Murray with a closet-full of solid prospects in St. Louis, or labour under Richard Peddie in Toronto?

I’ve got an idea! To answer that question, let’s go back one whole paragraph and play a game of mad libs.

Cox wrote:
“With those three years, of course, Armstrong can afford to be picky and why in the world would he accept anything less than full GM powers from a lousy team like the _______, particularly since his resume for the past decade is much more impressive than _________’s?”

In my version, I replace the word "Leafs" with "Blues" and "Fletcher" with "Larry Pleau” and the answer is:

Why in the world would Armstrong accept anything less than full GM powers from a lousy team like the Blue's particularly since his resume for the past decade is much more impressive than Larry Pleau’s?

I'm guessing that answers Cox's question...

You'd think Cox, an editor, an intern or maybe a person wandering around the newsroom looking for a pen might have picked up on the fact that anyone that bothered to read Cox's copy would notice the gaping hole in Cox's logic - afterall, it is only one paragraph up.

Come to think of it, one would hope the senior hockey writer at a paper like the Toronto Star would:
a) re-read his work to remove poor reasoning/ circular logic
b) realize that GM openings are usually with teams that are “lousy” and;
c) “lousy” teams usually seek GMs that have had lots of success – usually more success than the men they are reporting to and replacing.

Despite this, sadly Cox continues his entry:

What Peddie would love, of course, is for Fletcher to remain in charge so he can keep his job title as president, having lost basketball responsibilities when Bryan Colangelo took over the Raptors. Its all about territorial protection in the corporate world.

The way I see it, Cox is either moonlighting on the MLSE cleaning staff to get insider information - just like Charlie Sheen in Wall Street. Or, Cox has found a way to transport himself right inside Richard Peddie’s cranium – just like “Being John Malkovich” I can think of no other explanation as to how Cox knows what Peddie would love.

If you ask me, I think Peddie would really just love an ice cream sandwich (but that type of insight is likely why the Star doesn't pay me to make stuff up).

Cox continues:

So unless Burke suddenly becomes available, the likeliest scenario appears to have Peddie remain as prez, Fletcher as interim GM and either one or more people without authority operating in a reconstituted hockey office.

Man, after reading this I really have no new insights and way more questions:

• Why would Fletcher's hires not have any authority?
• Why is it a “collection of great hockey minds” when other organizations load up their hockey staff, but it’s all “obscure promises” and “no authority” when it happens in Toronto?
• Did someone at MLSE run over Cox’s dog? Twice?
• How is it that Cox draws a pay cheque for this?
• How long until the Star changes his beat? (Please)
• What are the odds of the Star Sports department bringing in a fresh voice - one that doesn’t see failure, conspiracy and Machiavellian maneuvering in every move at the ACC?
• How long before the new President and GM of the Toronto Maple Leafs is torched by the media - will it even take minutes or will we have to measure it in nano-seconds?
• If this is the quality Cox brings to his blog, what's the value proposition?

Cox's final, ahem, "thought" on how things are allegedly developing down at MLSE:

Interesting but, as usual, utterly moronic.

And with that, I think Cox may have nailed the best six word summary of Damien Cox that ever was or will be.

This is epitaph material right here.