Bitter Leaf Turns 6

I started this blog six years ago - March 26, 2006. The Leafs were floundering as an organization, they were out of the playoffs, the GM's moves were not panning out, and the future looked cloudy. It's hard to believe how much has changed...

Over the last six years, I've posted nearly 500 entries, been read by maybe 35 people and logged a very small number of page views. More importantly, I've found a somewhat productive outlet to deal with the Leafs and the frustration and disappointment that unites us all.

A look back at some of my favourite posts from the past six years:

1. My very first post: Tedesco, Ferguson and Me
2. Toronto sports media story generator (this one might be my favourite)
3. Taking on one of the most tired tropes: Are the Fans to blame?
4. On JFJ's Reign of Error and his firing
5. First Leafs games - my daughter's and my son's
6. Top Ten items I'd like to see banned from Leafs coverage
7. An open letter to the Ottawa Senators
8. My first anti-Burke post - 7 months before he was hired
9. On Sundin and the Leafs' captains - I'm so sick of Goodbyes
10. Some dislike for Darcy Tucker here, here, here, here, here and here.

Thanks to all of you who have read an entry, left a comment or sent me an email. Hopefully I'll be able to put up a post about the Leafs winning a playoff game when this Blog turns 10.

Darcy Tucker retires, but the cap hit lingers on

I was never much of a Darcy Tucker fan.

He was a small man who played a big man’s game. He threw big hits, would fight just about anyone and excelled at the cross-crease tap in on the power play. While that may have brought him the adoration of many Leafs fans, he was also a pylon on the defensive side of the puck and had a terrible propensity for taking dumb penalties.

Say what you will about +/- (and we all recognize that it's a flawed stat) but Tucker was only on the plus side of the ledger three times in his 14 year career. On the Leafs, Tucker was always pretty much the worst ranked of his peers: 32 of 33 in 2003; 15 of 36 in 2004; 28 of 32 in 2006; 30 of 30 in 2007; 26 of 32 in 2008.

What's the old joke? A Darcy Tucker hat trick is a power play goal, bad penalty and a -2 on the night.

My feelings for Tucker would likely be different if he'd taken a page from Bryan McCabe's play book and allowed the Leafs to trade him. Instead, Tucker decided to shiv my beloved blue and white, sticking them with a cap hit through to 2014. Sure, Tucker was 100% legally correct in making the Leafs buy him out, but contract law is rarely the basis for picking who you cheer and who you despise at the rink. This was clearly demonstrated by Tucker's return to the ACC, which was marked with a tribute video, while poor McCabe, who did the right thing, returned to a chorus of boos.

In announcing his retirement, Tucker has been talking up his love of the Leafs but I don't believe it. Not one bit. I look at that buy-out he saddled my favourite team with and all I can think is, $6 million is the equivalent of how many billion grains of salt?



Find all the best pubs for watching Leaf games at YellowPages.ca

You're older now and you're a clever swine

As I get older, I find it more and more difficult to take pleasure from the suffering of others. For some unknown reason, I don't find myself actively hoping for the bad guys to fail.

Of course, there's something to be said about having your hunches confirmed.

Darcy Tucker TOI: 15:27 0G 0A 0PiM -1 1 shot
Andrew Raycroft .766sv% 7.00 GAA

I Got By in Time

The guys at uber Leaf site PPP graciously asked me to submit a post on Darcy Tucker. Sideshow Bob is playing against the Leafs tonight for the first time since his buyout this Summer. Here's what I sent them...

With the exception of Mats Sundin, has there been a Leaf as polarizing as Darcy Tucker?

When one thinks of Tucker, it's just as easy to conjure up a big hit, countless cross-crease power play tap-ins and a little man willing to take on all comers as it is to recall countless bad penalties, terrible defensive play and a propensity to end up on his ass along the side wall scrambling after that helmet of his that somehow just couldn’t stay on.

Then there's the whole Sideshow Bob act: was it a display of passion and tenacity or a guy all too often playing on the wrong side of the edge (ask yourself this: if it was Tucker going after Kostitsyn instead of Grabbo what would the reaction of Leafs-nation been?)

I don't know if it's unique to the Leafs, but this is a fan base that (sometimes inexplicably) elevates certain players and vilifies others to degrees that aren’t quite warranted.

Hard work (or the perception of working hard) is often the tipping point that determines where on the Leafs Nation Effigy to ElegyTM spectrum a player ends up.

Even with (or maybe because of) his Sideshow Bob antics, Darcy Tucker was beloved by most of Leafs nation.

Tucker put up respectable numbers during his time with the Leafs, breaking the 20 goal mark in five out of his nine seasons in the Blue and White and he finished with a respectable 148 goals and 319 points in 531 games.

But he often struggled on the other side of the puck and had a penchant for taking untimely penalties.

Say what you will about +/- (and we all recognize that it's a flawed stat) but Tucker has only been a plus three times in his 12 year career. On the Leafs, Tucker could usually be found at or near the bottom of the club (32 of 33 in 2003; 15 of 36 in 2004; 28 of 32 in 2006; 30 of 30 in 2007; 26 of 32 in 2008).

My standard joke: The Darcy Tucker hat trick is a power play goal, a bad penalty and -2 on the night.

What these numbers don’t reflect is Tucker’s approach to the game. He was a small man who played a big man’s game. He threw big hits, would fight just about anyone, and if he ever had a thought, he seemed to share it with anyone and everyone on the ice.

While that may have brought him the adoration of Leafs Nation, this style of play may also have brought an untimely end to his career; which brings us to tonight.

For the first time since his buyout last summer (a final act of devotion or a final stick in the eye of the Leafs?), Tucker is facing his former club.

If history has taught Leaf fans anything, it's that former players (prospects, guys that wore a Leaf jersey once when they were 6 years old, etc.) have a long tradition of coming back to have big games against the Blue and White (see Boyes, Rask, Sullivan, Roberts, Bester, Bradley, etc.)

But for the first time in a long time I don't have that awful feeling that a former player is going to burn the Leafs.

Hip and knee issues have put Tucker on pace for just 9 goals this season and lowest point total since he broke into the league full time in 1997. He has all of 2 assists so far in 2009.

That level of production can't justify a $2.5M pay cheque. I wouldn’t be surprised if Tucker faces the ignominious fate of being the first NHLer to be bought out twice.

In fact, the fans in Colorado have already turned on him:

Terrible defensively, slower than paint drying, gets knocked on his ass all the time, takes stupid penalties, and tends to get in the way offensively. But, he's really good at tip-ins when he's not covered in front of the net. Too harsh? Maybe; Tucker does get some big hits in. But he's been a disappointment even compared to our low expectations. In general, I have been very pleased with the way Tony Granato has handled his personnel this year, but I don't understand why he keeps using Tucker late in the game.

- Mile High Hockey

Darcy Tucker is still getting powerplay time based on what results? Wojtek Wolski, Milan Hejduk, Ryan Smyth, Marek Svatos, Chris Stewart and Cody Mcleod are all scoring at a better rate than Tucker. They were all in the lineup. So was the slumping T.J. Hensick who might benefit from a little boost to his playing time.

- Avs Talk

Darcy Tucker has shown a bona fide "lack of effort" in a lot of games this season. He takes stupid penalties and doesn't offer anything on the defensive end, and offers very little on the offensive end. He just looks disinterested.

- JibbleScribbits

The fact is, Tucker never should have been re-signed by JFJ.

Yes, he was having a career year but how refreshing would it have been for the Leafs to finally trade a player at their highest value? If Nagy’s eight goals were worth a first rounder and a player at that trade deadline, imagine what Tucker might have been worth?

I don’t know that I’ll boo him tonight. It’s hard to get riled up about a guy who’s so clearly on the downside of his career.

Moreover, like McCabe I’d rather just treat all these ex-Leafs that were signed to awful contracts by JFJ as treyf.

So instead of espousing hatred, or suggesting anyone boo, I’ll just ask that Darcy Tucker be kept front in centre in the lack of leadership debate that swirled around this team when Wilson first took over. That he be remembered as a key cog in the problematic Corson-Green clique that caused a schism in the Leafs dressing room. And finally all Leafs Nation remember Tucker as one of the primary members of the NTC 5 who refused a trade at the deadline, refused to waive his NMC in the off-season, refused to help this franchise re-build and finally demanded a buy-out that saddled the Leafs with a cap hit through to 2013.

And no matter where on the effigy to elegy spectrum one might put Tucker, I think all Leaf fans can come together in the hope that Tucker doesn’t get the GWG against the Leafs tonight.

I Thought There Was a Virtue in Always Being Cool

The Leafs may be kicking-off a brand new season in Detroit tonight, but before we move on to the theme of renewal, blank slates and fresh starts (and ultimately loss, hey it's the whole circle of life thing), I want to turn the clock back a few months and ask a rather pointed question: where's the hatred for Darcy Tucker?

You don't have to go far to find criticism of the other Leafs who refused to be traded at the deadline. You don't even have to leave the Barilkosphere, just look here, here, here, here, here, and here.

Mats gets it, McCabe gets it and someone actually woke Raycroft up and told him nap time is now on the Avalanche's bench .

But where's the indignation over Tucker?

I don't see it on the blogs and I have yet to see any circle the dates (January 29, 2009 for those of you keeping score at home) or "will they or won't they boo Tucker?" articles in my local sports pages.

Dude was the lynch pin of the problematic Corson-Green dressing room schism, should be front in centre in the lack of leadership debate, refused a trade at the deadline, refused to waive his NMC in the off-season, refused to help this franchise re-build and finally demanded a buy-out that saddled the Leafs with a cap hit through to 2013.

You read that right: 2-0-1-3. You could get a university degree, finish most professional schools (law, dentistry, medicine) or if you have a baby this season it would be starting school by the time Tucker's pay-out wraps up.

And this from a self-proclaimed team-first guy.

For all of these failings, for how he stuck the Leafs there's nothing but silence...

Doesn't anyone else find that odd?

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.

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.

If You're Gonna Stay Show Some Mercy Today

Sport was the main occupation of all of us, and continued to be mine for a long time. That is where I had my only lesson in ethics. – Albert Camus.

Perhaps it’s because the sub-text of all sports is about complying with rules and the notions of fair play, ethics and good sportsmanship that fans often develop the expectation that these same values and attributes can and should be found in the professional athletes themselves.

It would be nice to think that the athletes who show leadership, loyalty and courage on the field of play would demonstrate these same attributes off it.

Unfortunately, for me, there’s far too much evidence to the contrary to carry that expectation very far.

This leads me to Mats Sundin.

I think the main reason why there is such divergent views about Sundin’s future is that one-side of the debate is focusing on the explicit rules as found in the CBA, while the other half focuses on those implicit notions, characteristics and values of sport (e.g. doing what’s “right” for the team).

Further complicating matters is money (it’s always money).

Mats Sundin has led the Leafs in every significant statistical category for over a decade and is arguably one of, if not the greatest, player to have skated for the Blue and White. For this, he has been remunerated exceptionally – staggeringly – well.

But does the size of the pay cheque change the principle issue? Should an employee forgo a contractually bargained right and do something against his explicitly expressed desire because it’s in the best interest of his employer and a nebulous group of people called “fans” simply because he’s been well paid?

My answer is no (and clearly others disagree).

But while we’re on the topic of loyalty and what a player “owes” his team and the fans, I’d like to move away from Mats for a minute and propose something entirely new that I’m sure most Leaf fans can agree with.

I think MLSE should ask Jason Blake and Darcy Tucker to retire for the good of the team (and, let’s face it, the best-interest of many fans).

It certainly would be a “loyal” thing for Blake and Tucker to do. It would avoid the ugly spectacle of buy-outs or trips to the minors and the Leafs would be absolved of two hefty long-term cap hits.

Let’s face it, both of these guys have made millions upon millions of dollars for playing a simple kids’ game. Isn't it time Blake and Tucker put the good of the team before their personal best interests and wishes and just hung up their skates?

As long suffering fans, don’t they owe us that much?

It's the match-ups, stupid

Not to blather on about the last minute shift choices again, especially after an allegedly hard-fought win (I didn't watch the game - I went to see Juno, quite liked it) but what the hell are Blake and Tucker doing on the ice in the final minute trying to protect a 3-2 lead?

Leafs get a last minute change on the fly and somebody wearing a suit and tie and standing behind the bench thought Tucks and Blake were suddenly shut-down forwards? Did an usher from the platinums sneak back there to set up the final line combos?

Bottom five in the PK.

Bottom five in the PP.

Out-shot 14-1 to start the game.

Bad line matching sends the game to OT.

If the new President/GM wants to affect real change, looking behind the bench might not be a bad place to start.

You Say You Want a Revolution?

Went to the Leafs - Blues game last night, we were lucky enough to get my wife's corporate seats. Yup, corporate seats. I've been to four games this year and three of those were as the guest of large corporations on expense accounts. Which brings me back to this crazy concept that somehow Leaf fans are to blame for the current teams' woes.

Last night, I asked the people around me how they got their tickets ($160 reds). All of them are season tickets held by corporations - the guys to my right got their seats from a car dealership (the ticket holder apparently owns four dealerships); the foursome in front of me were from an ad agency; the two to their left were part of a restaurant chain; and the two to my wife's left were held by a big food multinational (who also have a box at the ACC).

This is something that Dave Feschuk picked up on over at the Star today; clearly it's not the average joe that's filling the coffers for MLSE and padding that oh so comfortable bottom line.

Malibu Stacy may tell us that "math is hard" but let's do a little rudimentary accounting.

The ACC has 1020 platinum seats at $400 each, which generates $400K per game (not including the margins from sushi and wine sales).

In the upper bowl there are approximately 3330 Purple Seats at $37 a pop, generating approximately $120K per game. Fold-in the 300 standing room places at $24 each and you've got an extra $7200 - call it $130K.

Time to compare and contrast: the purple dwelling Leafs Nation lunch box crowd is being outspent by the corporations in the platinums by about $3 to $1.

Put another way: one row of platinum seats generates more income for MLSE than all of the standing room tickets combined.

Now factor in 300 luxury suites. I don't know what the original purchase price or seat licensing costs were, but a 42 person suite rents out for $10K per game and a 57 person suite is $13K. The "cheaper" rental is the equivalent of selling 270 tickets up in the purples, more than 10 rows worth of seats.

So if you think refusing to buy the car flag, canceling Leafs TV and declining those $37 purples will make a difference, go for it. I honestly encourage Leaf fans to vote with their wallets. Seriously. After all, maybe Mike Babcock is right, - it is the common fan that's propping this organization up and keeping them from a re-build.

Looking at the numbers I find it very hard to believe it's so.

###

As for the game itself, Tlusty got banged around like it was the first time he played contact hockey, but I'll give him credit for getting up and staying in the thick of things all night. If he could find a second gear or any type of explosive speed he'd be a far more dangerous player. Tlutsy seemed to play the whole game at half-speed (or else his top speed is really poor). He could find the openings, but his lack of secondary speed kept him from been truly dangerous.

The Tucker, Blake, Stajan line really surprised me. Tucker was great on the forecheck (this from a guy who has pushed to trade #16 for years) but he's an absolute pylon defensively. Blake's through the legs back pass happened right in front of us and was amazing.

As I watched Legace stymie the Leafs time after time, I started undergoing serious cognitive dissonance - had JFJ signed Legace as a UFA, the Leafs would still have Rask plus their 2007 1,2,4 picks and likely would have made the playoffs last year. Of course, that would mean JFJ would still be GM giving me chronic heartburn by screwing this team over in new and inventive ways...

Fight Test

Got an email from MLSE notifying me that today (04/01/08) is Darcy Tucker bobblehead night at Ricoh Coliseum. I had to double check the note as I was pretty sure that promotion took place last night in Pittsburgh...

Do the Collapse

I hope all of you had a wonderful holiday season and a great New Year.

The only thing I managed to do over the holidays was grow a beard. (Well, it might not constitute a beard - I just haven’t shaved since Christmas Eve). Somewhat shockingly my newly hirsute chin hasn’t brought the Leafs the expected luck. Perhaps this facial hair thing only works in the playoffs…

This Leafs team and organization still leaves me cold; such a culture of losing that seems to be getting more and more ingrained...since this team loves to cough up the last minute goal and throw away points, I thought I’d have a look at who Coach Mo has been tapping for ice time in critical late-game situations – specifically those tied /close games versus Carolina, Tampa, the Islanders and Tampa again.

The Leafs picked up four points from this series of games when they should have easily walked away with at least six if not more. Looking at line combinations, I would suggest in at least two of those games it was the Leafs poor line changes/match-ups that cost them the game and the points. Keep that in mind come March when the Leafs are desperately in need of points and chasing that last playoff spot.

After looking at who's on the ice with the game on the line, the critical question I'd like to ask (or better yet, have answered is): Is the inability to get the right guys on the ice at the right time a failure of the coaching staff or do the Leafs simply not have enough depth to hide certain weak ES guys (Tucker, Wellwood, Blake) in late game situations?

I’ll let you read on and then decide…

December 18 Leafs v. Hurricanes

With just under 2 minutes to go in a 2-0 game, Maurice ices what has arguably been the Leafs best forward line, while Gill has been strong on D this year…

White
Gill
Steen
Stajan
Devereaux

Unfortunately, Caroline cashes one in to make it 2-1.

Maurice comes back with arguably his top 5 man unit:

Kaberle
Kubina
Ponikarovski
Sundin
Antropov

And the Canes score off the bad turnover/cough-up by Poni who was staring down an open net…if I were behind the bench (and lord help Leaf fans if that were the case) I’d likely roll the lines the exact same way…

December 20 Leafs v. Tampa

Two nights later, the Leafs and Bolts are tied 1-1 on the road late in the game and Maurice rolls out:

Kubina
Kaberle
Blake
Wellwood
Tucker

You can blame Kubina’s broken stick all you want (and hey, the Leafs and all of their spokespeople sure did) but the fact is Kaberle covered for Kubina and broke up the ensuing rush. It was Blake’s soft turnover at the Leafs’ blue line (remember that) coupled with Tucker’s failure to cover his man that gave Lecavalier the chance to put the puck in the back of the net.

If I were coach, that forward line wouldn’t see the ice at ES or PK when there’s less than five minutes remaining in the game. Tucker is murder at ES, Wellwood is a creative playmaker, but couldn’t go into a corner if he lived in a square and Blake leads the league in turnovers. I really don’t see how this is a winning combination. I would love to know what Maurice was thinking here…

December 26 Leafs v. Islanders

It’s overtime, four on four, tie game. Leafs have just come off a PP that generated lots of chances so Kubina and Kaberle aren’t available to Maurice. The Leafs change on the fly, sending out:

White
Strahlman
Wellwood
Blake

Gill isn’t the fastest skater, but I’m still very surprised Maurice would go with a rookie and little-man White at that point in the game. What makes this line change especially questionable is the forward paring – the Leafs smallest/greenest D with the two softest and smallest forwards in Wellwood and Blake. I don’t understand this pairing at all, especially given the forward's presence on the ice for the winning (losing goal) in the final minute against Tampa in just the previous game.

So what happens? Blake turns the puck over at the Isles’ blue line (quelle surpise!) the Leafs have a soft back-check and Comrie pots the winner off a rebound.

Of note - the Stajan, Steen, Devereaux line doesn’t see a single second of ice during OT…once more, would love to know if any of the media horde questioned the coach on his decision to play small in the extra frame.

The Leafs go on to sleep through a game in Philly and get positively smoked by the Rangers before going up against the cellar-dwelling Lightning on January 1, 2008.

With the Leafs up by one going into the third, Maurice shortens his bench. Belak, Bell, Tlusty get a single shift at the three minute mark and that’s it for them. (Good thing Bell was part of that Toskala trade and is under contract for one more year at $2M+…).

With a minute to go, Maurice reunites the Steen, Stajan, Devereaux line, which had been broken up for this game (Steen played with Blake and Sundin; Stajan played with Tucker and Kilger). Tampa pots an odd one off a deflected long-shot and the game goes to OT and the shoot-out.

I think this was a good call by Maurice, as that line has been very dependable and it was a bit of an odd goal that tied it up…thankfully he kept Wellwood in the press box and Tucker and Blake didn’t see the ice in the final three minutes of the game.

To sum up: by my estimation, that makes Maurice 2 for 4 in terms of managing his bench during critical moments of these four games, which isn’t good enough.

Admittedly, these odd coaching decisions are nothing new. In game one, Maurice sent Tucker out in OT against the Heatley line when the Leafs had the last change at home. But by now, you’d think the coaching staff would have seen enough of Tucker, Blake and Wellwood to know that they shouldn’t be on the ice at ES at critical points in the game. While I’m hopeful the club has learned from those games in Tampa and Carolina (though I really doubt it).

Perhaps we'll get another chance to see the Leafs try to match lines against the Pens tonight...hopefully Tucker and Blake can avoid lining up against Sid and Malkin.

Speaking of Cox

I picked up a Toronto Star sports section that had been abandoned on the subway this morning. I probably should have stuck to my book.

I'm going to tread into CoxBloc territory here and I don't even know where to start. Cox assembles a rambling collection of "thoughts" on the Rangers-Leafs pre-game festivities; McCabe's gaffe; Tlusty's photos and comes to the strange conclusion that the Leafs have sold their soul.

Where to begin? Let's start with the pre-game shenanigans, in the print edition Cox writes:

Were [Stafford] Smythe around yesterday, the collective misbehaviour of today's Leaf millionaires would undoubtedly have made him throw up.

For starters, you had the team and one of the veterans it counts upon for mature leadership, Darcy Tucker, rapped on the knuckles and fined by the NHL for participating in a truly adolescent scene last Saturday night in the pre-game warm-up with the Rangers.

So in the print world of Mr. Cox, one would conclude that the skirmish must be a pretty big deal. It's the first page lead (or lede for your print-junkies) it includes an exhumation of poor Stafford Smythe, and it produces the usual smug indignation from Cox.

But over in the electronic world of the Star it's a bit of a different story.

In his on-line "blog" (which is just another 500 word column that the Star insists on calling a blog even thought it has all the intimacy and two-way communication of K-Fed and Britney's marriage with about half the intellect) Cox writes of the skirmish:

Everybody's up in arms about Sean Avery after Saturday night's Rangers-Leafs game, and to be sure this is a juicy story. But outrage? I don't think so. Peel away all the rhetoric and here's what you have: two guys pushed and shoved during the pre-game warm-up, said nasty things to each other and then fought during the first period. Big Deal.

I'd just like to know which one it is - blog=no big deal or front-page=lead item and big deal?

Flipping back to the print story, Cox concludes the Avery-Tucker skirmish with this odd thought:

Try as they might to make it all Sean Avery's fault, the Leafs were, essentially, found equally culpable in the idiotic episode.

The Rangers were fined $25,000 and the Leafs $10,000. Avery was fined $2,500 and Tucker was fined $1,000. The League said, "The unprofessional conduct of Avery in initiating this altercation...is the basis for this discipline....Tucker also bears some responsibility for his inappropriate response. "

So, the Rangers fines are 2.5x those of the Leafs. The League found that Avery was the initiator while Tucker only bears "some responsibility" and Cox concludes that the Leafs are "equally" culpable.

That's the strangest definition of "equal" I've ever encountered.

Next up: the McCabe give-away.

It was a bad pass. A horrific pass. A stupid play. Next...

Oh good, more moral indignation from Cox - just what we all needed - and this time it's poor Jiri Tlusty in the cross-hairs.

For those of you living under a rock, the kid took some naked photos of himself and emailed them to a woman, who promptly posted them all over the web. The fact that the Toronto media are only picking up on this today (it's the front page of the Toronto Sun) tells me these guys need to trade in their dial-up modems and check out this thing called the world-wide-web. Deadspin broke the Tlusty story on November 8 and it's been on Leaf discussion boards for days. That's a long time in this world of 24 hour news cycles and breaking stories, yet Cox only brings his faux-moral indignation to the table today, he writes:

...if this was a team of pride and tradition, Tlusty wouldn't have been in the lineup last night and Leaf ownership wouldn't have been hiding behind a press release.
The youngster would be back in the minors, having disgraced what was once a Canadian institution – a team that once had a member of Parliament in its lineup – with his amateur porn shots. Ownership, meanwhile, would be vowing to make certain such foolishness never reoccurred.

Really? A teenager sends a naked photo and he's disgraced a Canadian institution? For posing naked he should be sent to the minors? Is once having a member of Parliament in its lineup really the best indicator of quality? Has Cox ever watched question period? What's a bigger disgrace to the Leaf brand - a teenage prospect posing naked for a cell-phone photo or a paedophile ring being run out of Maple Leaf Gardens? Hmm...so many questions.

Sure Tlutsy was rather misguided in sending those photos, but to call for his demotion in order to protect the Leaf brand - a brand that is somewhat sullied after 40 years of losing, managerial incompetence, criminal behaviour and other assorted f*ck ups is a bit rich.

That said, I do look forward to future columns from Cox calling for the suspension of Garth Snow for encouraging hot (well, hottish) girl on girl action. Keeping Robbie Schremp buried in the AHL for his frightening photos in a bad thong. Shutting down the NBA for the way players interact with fans (some of those guys are married!). The elimination of NFL franchises in Cincinnati and Minnesota (surely Cox would call for Fred Smoot to be sent out to sea, alone on an ice floe) and the future of Isiah Thomas outside of sports, perhaps as a squeegee kid.

Look, I'm not saying that athletes shouldn't be held to the same standards as the rest of us. I'm not saying that Tlusty didn't make a mistake and I'm not saying there isn't a place for some sort of moral decency.

But I'm sick of Cox being all incensensed and sanctimonious over what are essentially mistakes. A teenager posed naked; McCabe blew a pass; Tucker and Avery had a little spat - is this really the right fodder for the front page of a sports section? Can one really tie these things together and conclude that a franchise has lost it's soul? Is this really the best that Cox can do?

As an aside, didn't the Leafs sell their soul back in the 70s? I'm pretty sure you can only sell your soul once. It's just like the "city losing it's innocence" trope that lazy media types love to trot out - once that innocence is gone, just like one's soul - there's no getting it back.

As for Cox, if this is the best he can do and he honestly believes that last night was some sort of tipping point or threshold for the Leafs, it's time he heeded his own advice to McCabe and considers a move to a new market to ply his trade.

Heaven holds a place for those who pray

Darcy Tucker, Leafs Nation turns it bilious eyes to you.

In game one versus the Sens, he turned the puck over to Fisher at the Ottawa blue line, never got back in the play and it’s a Sens win.

Tonight he takes a questionable penalty, Canes make it 3-1; turns the puck over at the blue line, Canes make it 4-1; takes another penalty to start the third, Canes make it 5-1.

I presume Tucker is hurt (I’ll give even-odds it’s a brain injury) as four games into this young season his numbers are positively Hatcher-esque: a team worst -5, pointless in four games, and the only thing he’s agitating are the fans.

How bad is JFJ’s decision to ink him to a multi-year $3.5M contract looking now? Perhaps Tucker will turn it around (and maybe Raycroft will re-discover his Calder trophy form).

81 More Games of This...

Question for the coach:

As the home team, you have the last line change and the ability to control line match-ups.

I was just wondering what hockey genius thought it was a good idea to match Tucker, (a notoriously weak ES player) against Heatley (notorious for owning your club) in a four-on-four situation with the game on the line?

Shoot-out blues

...add another item to the list of bad stats that leaves me cold when I think of Raycroft holding the Leafs' single season win record: Raycroft's terrible record in the shoot-out. I'm not talking win/loss, I'm talking save percentage.

Raycroft has been beaten 13 times on 32 shots for a .594 sv%

That puts him 30th among goalies who've faced at least 10 shots and well below the league average of .678%

===

Gotta wonder what Maurice is thinking when he picks his shooters.

Poni went 0 for 7 before Maurice looked elsewhere, Tucker was 1 for 5 before he was blanked against the Habs tonight (he's now a lumbering 1 for 6). Given how O'Neill and Steen buried the biscuit against NJ, you'd think Coach Maurice would go back to them...

Tucker

Damien Cox at the Star broke a big story this morning: the Leafs have apparently inked Tucker to a three (or four) year deal at about $3M per year.

It will be interesting to see what the actual terms of the contract are when MLSE makes it official. My understanding of the CBA is that option years are prohibited, so I’m not sure how the fourth year might be structured.

I don’t think $3M is out of line and a three year term is preferable to anything longer, but I would have liked JFJ to move Tucker* for picks and prospects. Unfortunately, such a deal would certainly throw a wrench into JFJ’s apparent need to make the post-season in order to keep his job. While another first round pick would be a great thing for this club to have and would certainly be in line with JFJ’s build-from-within-plan (if such a plan actually existed) it will be years before that pick can bang in a cross-crease pass on the power play and that’s what really seems to matter to MLSE with 20 games left to go this season.

*Why move Tucker? Here are 10 good reasons:

1. He’s a small man playing a big man’s role and he’s on the wrong side of 30 (32 next month actually). How long before his body starts to break down?
2. In 12 NHL seasons, he’s only played the full schedule twice
3. He's not much of a penatly killer, he’s weak at 5 on 5 (he’s -64 for his career) - what the heck do you do with him and the monster contract it’s going to take to keep him when his hands start to go?
4. Since coming to the Leafs he’s averaged 19.8 goals a season (not including this injury shortened year). I’m not knocking 20 goals, but $3.5M+ and a non-trade or a no-movement clause is way too much to pay for that level of performance (interesting that many only want O’Neill and his 20 goals back at his current salary but they’ll pay double for Tucker)
5. The team hasn’t suffered in his absence. With Tucker in the line-up the Leafs are 18-16-5 that's a .526 winning percentage; without Tucker they’re 10-7-3 a .650 winning percentage
6. In 62 playoff games, Tucker has 10 goals and is a -5. Somehow if this team makes the post-season, I don't think that level of performance is going to be the difference between hoisting the Cup and going home early.
7. If Nagy’s eight goals are worth a first rounder and a player, Tucker has to be worth more, lots more.
8. If the Leafs really can’t live without Tucker, let’s learn from some of the other GMs and do what the Blues and Penguins managed to do with Weight and Recchi – deal them at the deadline and sign them back in the off-season.
9. This team missed the playoffs last year and is on the bubble this year. In a hard cap environment with $19 million tied up (and seemingly unmovable) on D, I really don’t see how the team can commit $3.5 to $4M for Tucker and hope to get better next year.
10. This year’s UFA crop is rich in forwards, the club would be better off allocating Peca’s $2.5M and Tucker’s $3.5M to someone who can pick up the crown and lead this club once Mats calls it quits.

Playoffs, Contracts and the Trade Market,

Trade Deadline Deals: What's the Market?

Forsberg goes to Nashville for Upshall, Parent, a first round pick and a conditional third rounder...quite the purse for 24 regular season games of Forsberg plus however many games they can make-it in the post-season.

Given Foppa's ankle/back/foot/ injury woes, Nashville will be lucky to get him for 20 games and 90% of the post-season match-ups.

Nagy (8g/33a/41pts -3) goes to Dallas for a first round pick and Tjarnqvist. Amazingly, those 41 points put him first in scoring in Dallas.

Shane Doan (19g/16a/35pts -7) signs a $22.75M/five year deal (cap hit=$4.55M/yr) with the Phoenix Coyotes.

Tucker (19g/12a/31 -13) has better numbers this season than both Nagy and Doan in far fewer games. He's got more miles and less upside than Doan, so the contracts aren't exactly comparable (although I'm sure Sosa is already working up the spreadsheets for JFJ's consideration).

Given the prices paid for Forsberg, Nagy; given the money thrown at Doan; given the $18M tithed to the Leafs D; and given that the Leafs are playing their best hockey with Tucks on the sideline, it's clearly time for JFJ to pull the trigger and send Tucker out of town...sadly, I don't think it's going to happen.

Meaningless Projections as of Feb 15 - Leafs are in...

Team	Win %	GR	Record to 92 Pts	Record to 95 Pts
1. BUFFALO	0.707	24	5-19-0	6-17-1
2. NEW JERSEY	0.667	25	8-17-0	9-15-1
3. PITTSBURGH	0.616	26	11-14-1	13-13-0
4. OTTAWA	0.595	24	11-12-1	13-11-1
5. ATLANTA	0.585	23	11-11-1	13-10-0
6. TAMPA BAY	0.576	23	12-11-0	13-9-1
7. TORONTO	0.552	24	14-10-0	15-8-1
7. NY ISLANDERS	0.552	24	14-10-0	15-8-1
-----	--	-	--	--
9. MONTREAL	0.542	23	14-9-0	15-7-1
9. CAROLINA	0.542	22	13-8-1	15-7-0
11. NY RANGERS	0.535	25	15-9-1	17-8-0
12. BOSTON	0.509	27	18-9-0	19-7-1
13. WASHINGTON	0.474	24	18-6-1	20-4-0
14. FLORIDA	0.466	23	18-4-1	20-3-0

Teams are sorted by winning percentage, not points. Teams have not been re-seeded by division standings. Philadelphia cannot make 92 or 95 points.

Math was done by hand (while coding with Blogger's awkward interface) so please let me know if there are any errors.

Cracks in the Foundation

TSN has an interesting post on the on-going negotiations between MLSE and Darcy Tucker's camp, including the news that Tucker is looking for a no-movement clause.

Great. A no-movement clause. That's just what you want to give out in a hard-capped, guaranteed contract environment - especially to a hard-playing small bodied 32 year old who is approaching the brittle years of his career. Even better when your club already has 1/3 of its salary tied up in just three players on the blue line.

I know these things are played out in the media as part of the on-going negotiations between filthy rich athletes and the mega-corporations that employ them, but if MLSE can't ink this guy for less than $3.5M/year for 3 years without a NMC he should be dealt.

Oh wait, TSN quoted JFJ as saying what?

"I don't see too many playoff worthy teams shedding top players at the deadline. I would call that atypical."

Man, I hope JFJ is using "atypical" in the same way that it's atypical for a team to be this bad defensively while employing the second highest paid defence in the league.

Or maybe JFJ meant atypical like telling everyone you have a "Master Plan" that's all about building from within and then dealing your top ranked goaltending prospect for Raycroft...

Perhaps it's "top players" that JFJ is having trouble defining. Maybe by "top players" he means players that don't have a broken foot.

Parsing that sentence further it's the word shedding that's the clue, the Leafs won't be shedding Darcy they'll be trading him. Yeah, that's it...

Ah hell, JFJ is going to ink this guy to a four year, $15M+ deal with a big fat non-movement clause. The Leafs will be maxed out to the cap again thereby limiting their ability to make deals. Three years from now, MLSE GM Garth Snow will have to waive Tucker and the team will eat $1.88M in Salary...

One other thing to consider:
With Tucker, the Leafs are 18-16-5 that's a .526 winning percentage
Without Tucker, the Leafs are 9-6-1 good for a .593 winning percentage

False Dichotomies

As the trade deadline approaches, the dominant media frame is clearly this:

i) the Leafs have to qualify for the post-season if JFJ is going to hold on to his job
ii) given the injuries plaguing the team, in order to make the playoffs, JFJ may have to be a buyer at the trade deadline.

This results in simple "buyer v. seller" media coverage rather than addressing some of the bigger questions about the future of the Maple Leafs.

I’d like to take a step back from this media frame and ask a few questions:

1. Does anyone have a quote from anyone senior at MLSE or any other source indicating that JFJ needs to hit the post-season to keep his job?
2. The Leafs are facing a Herculean task to qualify for the post-season looking at picking up at least 18 wins in the remaining 30 games. Any probability experts out there who want to calculate what odds are longer: the Leafs making the post-season or their scouts drafting an impact player from the soft-middle ground the Leafs seem to permanently inhabit (not good enough to threaten the post-season, not bad enough to draft high).
3. Shouldn’t continued employment as the GM be contingent on achieving the best possible end for the organization?
4. Why does the media have to deal in these false dichotomies…there’s more than two ways forward for this team (hint: they’re playing great hockey without Tucker...)
5. Speaking of which, when it comes to dealing with Tucker’s impending UFA status, can’t JFJ figure out how to do what St.Louis and Pittsburgh did last year with Weight and Recchi respectively. Trade him to a contender with an implicit/informal agreement that he’ll re-sign back with the Leafs in the off-season. Get something for him now and get him signed up long-term in the summer.

Funny how a little win streak can change the way you look at things.

Does anyone really think the best thing for Leaf fans is to keep the bulk of this team together for next year?