The Phaneuf Era

Darryl Sittler, Rick Vaive, Wendel Clark, Doug Gilmour, Mats Sundin and Dion Phaneuf.

One of these things is not like the other.

On Monday, June 14th Dion Phaneuf was announced as the newest captain of my beloved Toronto Maple Leafs. To mark the occasion, Phaneuf read from prepared remarks with all the earnestness and awkwardness of a grade four student's first speech arts class.

I think Phaneuf is a serviceable hockey player. Coach Ron Wilson and GM Brian Burke are rather enamoured with him and their opinion counts for a whole lot more than mine. But I do have two concerns with Phaneuf wearing the C.

1. A one-time Norris trophy nominee, Phaneuf needs to re-establish his game as one of the premiere d-men in the NHL. Is the added responsibility and pressure of being captain going to help or hinder him?
2. Does he have the softer, off-ice skills to be the face of the Leaf franchise?

Restoring his game

Phaneuf's point totals have declined year over year for two straight seasons and his goals have been in decline for three straight. He's gone from a Norris nominated defenceman to being traded to the Leafs for an assorted pile of meh.

Given the voraciousness and non-stop coverage of the Toronto media market, is piling yet more expectations on Phaneuf's shoulders the best way for him to get his so-called game back?

Phaneuf responded to the media and overall attention of playing in hockey-mad Toronto by scoring 2 goals in 26 games, that's despite playing over 26 minutes a night.

To my eyes, he didn't appear to thrive on the new pressure and attention of playing in TO, but it's not like I have game film of his last few years in Calgary. (It should also be noted that he shot an abysmal 2.3% in Toronto and will likely regress to his norm of about 6% next year. No doubt, many will ascribe his renewed goal scoring production to the bright shiny C that has been freshly affixed to the front of his jersey. Don't believe it).

Phaneuf desperately needs to get his A-game back. I'm not sure giving him more pressure, more spotlight and more expectations is the best way for to help make that happen.

Handling the spotlight

My second concern with Phaneuf as captain is somewhat related, but rather than getting his own game back on track in this hockey mad market, I wonder if he has the stuff to be the so-called player face of the franchise.

If his speech at the newser is anything to go by, this is not a man that will impress in the scrums, shield his fellow players when they need it or distract the media hordes when things on the ice aren't going well. He may steal the pucks to draw media attention away from a loss, but I have the feeling he'd do it in warm-up.

Maybe it's just me, but I prefer my leaders to be a bit more cerebreal or for them to burn with a passion for hockey. When I looked in Wendel Clark's or Doug Gimour's eyes, I got the feeling they'd do anything to win. When I look in Dion's eyes, I get the feling he's having trouble sounding out a multi-syllabic compound word.

I don't suppose it matters much. The Leafs won't get better until the get more talent and several great players have worn the C in Toronto while the team crashed and burned.

One look around the NHL at the list of captains doesn't leave much to be impressed, or alternately, worried about.

How many Leaf Captains?

The Globe and Mail said Phaneuf is the 17th captain of the Leafs; the CBC said he's the 18th...here's the wiki list:

1. Bert Corbeau, 1927
2. Hap Day, 1927–37
3. Charlie Conacher, 1937–38
4. Red Horner, 1938–40
5. Syl Apps, 1940–43
6. Bob Davidson, 1943–45
7. Ted Kennedy, 1948–55
8. Sid Smith, 1955–56
9. Jimmy Thomson, 1956–57
   Ted Kennedy, 1957
10. George Armstrong, 1957–69
11. Dave Keon, 1969–75
12. Darryl Sittler, 1975–79
13. Rick Vaive, 1982–86
14. Rob Ramage, 1989–91
15. Wendel Clark, 1991–94
16. Doug Gilmour, 1994–97
17. Mats Sundin, 1997–2008
18. Dion Phaneuf, 2010

I do wonder what the correct total is?

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.

Often Wrong, Never in Doubt

There is nothing wrong with being hopeful. There is no shame in being an optimist or leaving oneself open to the possibility of miracles.

Hope is why sports fans return season after season.

Hope is why we watch the games, even when we know the coach should be fired and the team has a 3% chance of making the post-season.

Hope is what fans do.

Hope is pretty much all that Leaf fans have.

Or, to take it all the way back Epictetus circa 600 B.C. (when the Leafs Stanley Cup drought was just days old): When Thales was asked what is most universal, he answered, hope - for hope stays with those who have nothing else.

While hope may indeed be universal and the mainstay of Leafs Nation, it is another thing altogether for the men who run our favourite teams to predicate their plans or strategies on little more than hope or the remote likelihood of something positive happening.

And for far too long down at MLSE it has seemed that hope was the cornerstone of this franchise: sign the high-risk UFA and hope for the best; trade for the goalie in decline and hope for a return to form; trade away draft pick after draft pick and hope it doesn't hobble the franchise; hope to make the post-season where anything can happen but seldom does...

There didn't seem to be any discussion or consideration of the underlying principles that are required to transform a team from also-ran to elite status. There didn't seem to be much transparency, understanding or commitment to the cultural and institutional requirements of building a team that could eventually challenge for the Cup.

And I, for one, am hoping that all of this has begun to change at MLSE.

Consider:
John Ferguson Junior - arguably one of the worst GMs in Leafs history: Fired
Paul Maurice - qualified for the post-season three years out of 11: Fired
Randy Ladoceur - assistant coach and special teams failure: Fired
Steve McKichan - Raycroft's goalie coach: Fired
Dallas Eakins - assistant coach: Demoted
Mike Penny - assistant GM: Demoted

And the reaction from the media to this great news? The media's response to the return of accountability to the Leafs?

Given that we can't seem to get any coverage in this town that doesn't mention 1967, MLSE's greed and the need for qualified hockey men to run the team one would think the media would react positively to this decisive leadership.

And you'd be wrong.





















Of course, the media's reaction has nothing to do with currying favour and maintaining access.

It has nothing to do with trying to secure future book deals and inside sources.

It has nothing to do with the fact that for the first time in a long time the Leafs are controlling the message and limiting leaks.

Apparently, the media's current round of disdain for all things Leaf has everything to do with the quality of the men who were fired.

You know, the same fine men that have managed to make the Leafs one of just seven teams that hasn't qualified for the post-season since the lockout.

The same fine men that traded away the majority of their first round picks and coached the Leafs into 24th spot in the NHL with a 29th ranked penalty kill.

The same fine men that have steered the ship during the last four or five years of foundering.

The same fine men that have ensured that I will not be able to open a sports page nor turn on TSN or Sportsnet without being reminded of 1967 and my favourite team's failings for years and years to come.

I for one am happy that these fine men are no longer around to make a mess of my team.

The lesson here is clearly that for every silver lining, the media will find the black cloud. All that's left to figure out is how Leaf fans are to blame for this one too.

###

I love the fact that the Leafs are simulcasting the media conferences on their web-site (Maurice is here, Fletcher is here). Nothing like being able to see a newser first hand to compare what was actually said with what gets reported.

Great big tip o' the hat to the Leafs PR department - I hope this is a service they'll continue to provide.

###

What the hell was Dave Perkins smoking last night? He thinks the Leafs timed the announcement of Paul Maurice's firing to hide the fact that Tannenbaum is going to make money off bringing the Bills to Toronto?

Um, Mr. Perkins, you may want to listen to the Prime Time Sports puff piece that ran last night. Bobcat did about 15 minutes live to air with Rogers Communications' Vice-Chairman Phil Lind and Rogers' Director of Strategic Alliances Adrian Montgomery, neither of whom could stop talking about the overwhelming demand for tickets, ticket prices and the sound of ringing cash registers down at the Rogers Centre. You may also want to open a portfolio account with Canada News wire. As a member of the media, I know these news releases are emailed and faxed directly to you, but you may have missed the fact that publicly traded companies LOVE to talk about new revenues from things like excessive demand for NFL tickets in Toronto.

###

And I'm rather late to the party here, but hockey reference has opened their site to sponsorships of team and players. Leaf Fans should know PPP is working on a master plan that's worth checking out...you can read more about it at Cox Bloc and Down Goes Brown.

Getting no place fast as we can

The Leafs have called a newser for 3 PM. I suspect it's to confirm that Paul Maurice has been fired as head coach of the Toronto Maple Leafs, but other media are speculating it may be to announce a new GM.

###

It's telling that in firing Maurice, the biggest blow to this organization will be the loss of an occasionally amusing sound bite in the scrums. There certainly couldn't be a much worse outcome from behind the bench.

My complaints with Maurice are legion:

It was a rare thing for the team to be prepared, and far too often the team couldn't or wouldn't change the way they needed to play the game in order to win.

I disagreed with player development and his allocation of ice time, pointed out bad line match-ups, more stupid player personnel decisions and the team's failure to learn from past late game mistakes. Then there was the whole strange l'affiare Wozniewski. Come March, I finally had enough with the coaching of this club. And then there's Maurice's strange approach to the shoot-out.

If you don't want to read my typos, just consider the Leafs 2007-2008 results:

Team discipline: 4th overall in Times Shorthanded
Power Play: 15th
Penalty Kill: 29th
5th in the North East
12th in the Eastern Conference
24th overall

###

Much has been written, said, yelled, slurred and forgotten about the competitive advantage MLSE's deep pockets should give the Leafs.

While the organization is constrained to the rules of the CBA and the salary cap on the ice (just like all 29 teams they compete with) off the ice the Leafs' near bottomless resources should give the organization a clear cut advantage. And it's an advantage that I really want to see exploited.

There is no reason that this club shouldn't be directing every available resource to ensure they have the best coaching, scouting, training, and player development staff.

Looking at the results from behind the bench these last few years, it's clear that this was not the case with Maurice and his crew.

With the coaching post vacated, there's one more piece of business cleared away for an incoming GM.

I can't wait to see who Peddie, Kirke and the MLSE gang have decided on.

###

Tomorrow's media circus should make for fascinating reading. Who will defend Maurice to cultivate a source? Will this be positioned as more floundering from MSLE? If Bob Gainey were doing the firing instead of Cliff Fletcher, would this be another genius decision led by a powerful (or was it "determined") jaw? Hopefully this inspires Tart Cider to do another round of hockey commentariat interpretation.

The big payback

As much as I like Toskala, I always thought JFJ gave up way too much in that trade. The tipping point for me was the inclusion of Mark Bell. His price-to-performance ratio coupled with his off-ice troubles (and a surprise 15 game suspension to start the season) made it seem that JFJ had been taken once again*.

But if you break that deal down into its component parts, Toskala is proving to be worth a 1st and 2nd round pick and I'm pretty sure most Leaf fans would gladly give up a 4th round pick for this:



As for the game itself, it really couldn't have gone better.

Yeah I know, the Leafs might have been destroyed 8-2 giving up three short-handed goals in the process (that's some damn fine special teams work by Coach Maurice) but Leafs Nation needs to think about the big picture: losing improves the odds of a better draft pick; crapping the bed in their final home game confirms the need to completely change the composition of this club; and the softest team in the NHLTM may have sent a few Sens to the IR.

All in all, I'd call that a very successful night.

*The shame of the Toskala, Bell deal isn't the cost of Toskala and Bell, it's the price paid for Raycroft just one year earlier. I guess I can try to console myself by reading about sunk cost fallacies (or more likely, getting some rugelach from Harbord bakery).

Nine Tips for Media Types

I really appreciate the quality of the comments on this site, they often make me stop and think.

Case in point: The feedback on my Cox post deserved a response and my comment mushroomed into this (rather long) post.

I think we'd all agree that there certainly couldn't be much more Leafs coverage. There are upwards of 30 reporters covering the Leafs. To put that in perspective, the entire media contingent covering Queen's Park (the Province of Ontario's legislature) is just 31 journalists.

In addition to having their own TV channel, the Leafs are the lead item on each and every TSN and Sportsnet broadcast. Each paper has columnists and staff reporters covering the team. There are lunch time radio broadcasts devoted to all things blue and white. And then there's the comments at the Globe and Mail, filled by people who seem to spend more time complaining about the amount of Leaf coverage than they do cheering for their own teams.

So the quantity is unarguably there, but the quality side seems to be a bit lacking. How hard is it for a reporter or editorial staff to use a search function to scan the NHL CBA? How many times are reporters going to miss that both Tucker and McCabe have NMCs? If the media are unsure about a no-movement clause, why not phone the NHLPA, the agent or ask the player? Isn't that one of the benefits of being a trained professional with full access to sources?

That said, I do feel some sympathy for the media who cover the Leafs. There's so much media competition in this town (and with this team) that I can't imagine the pressure they're under from their editors and producers to cultivate sources and land big scoops.

I think this combination of editorial pressure and competitive media marketplace is the big reason that Cox has been publicly fellating JFJ in so many of his columns. Cox knows Ferguson will eventually land on his feet in the NHL and, if Cox has laid on enough adjectives, he may have cultivated an inside source in Ferguson - one that will be very helpful in fueling Cox with plenty of material for his faux-indignation-fueled tirades against MLSE.

That or Cox is looking to land his next book deal and has JFJ in his sites (admittedly, Cox did file a pretty solid piece in yesterday's paper).

Still, given the pressures and competition, it's hard to believe the amount of misinformation, poor fact checking and general lack of imagination that permeates so much of the Leafs media coverage. I'd like to think with their access, the reporters who file day in day out on all things Leaf might be able to come up with something more compelling then who's wearing the red jersey at practice, fake trade rumours or faux panic over the lack of formal job interviews conducted by MLSE.

Rather than just bitch and moan about the state of Leaf coverage and without much thought (like most of my posts) here are 9 ideas, off the top of my head, that I'd love to see followed-up by those who cover hockey and/or the Leafs:

1. More first person source reporting. This was one of my favourite articles last year - a Brian Burke first-person diary during the trade deadline. Could we get something similar from anyone at MLSE? Please? If not, I'd settle for any first-person insight at the GM level.
   
2. Use your access to really take readers behind the scenes. The consensus is the Leafs need to hold on to their draft choices and draft wisely. Can fans maybe get a profile (or two or three) of the Leaf scouts that will be helping make the decisions on draft day? What gems have they discovered? What do their peers on other clubs think of them? What's the hierarchy in the scouting department and how do draft day decisions get made? Maybe a day in the life of a Leaf scout...or a day in the life of a top OHL prospect. Gare Joyce's work on this was great stuff and surely demonstrated there's an audience for it. Wouldn't it be nice to get a bit more on these kids than Don Cherry and four or five of the top ranked 18 year olds passing around a microphone during a 45 second spot on HNIC?
   
3. Stop telling us what Leaf fans think. Leafs Nation is not a homogeneous entity and does not think with one mind. Even if Leaf fans did all agree, would anyone care? Moreover, it's a lazy literary device at best and completely misleading at worse.
   
4. Help the fans get insights from the coaches. The Leafs have the worst PK in the league and it's killing them. When was the last time anyone saw an interview with the special teams coach, or even with Maurice, where the Leafs approach to the PK was analyzed? What's working, what's not? Compare and contrast the Leafs' approach by interviewing special team coaches on more successful clubs. (And it doesn't have to be just the PK. There's the whole issue of zone v. man-to-man defence; team toughness/ use of enforcers; the shoot-out; power play; adapting to opponents; etc.)
   
5. Less of the trade rumour BS. Before the trade deadline there were, what, maybe 4 trades in the NHL? Yet every columnist weighs in with trade rumour after trade rumour, none of which come true and none of which advance a story of any relevance. (And can someone fine Dreger every time he uses the questionable at best "Sources are saying..." approach. If he had to put a twoonie in a jar for every time he used it he could make a hefty-donation to a worthy cause.)
   
6. More long form player profiles please. Joe O'Connor has being doing this masterfully with retired players over at the National Post, why not do it with the current or retired Leafs? (Or how about an update on Boyd Devereaux's record label?)
   
7. Help demistify the CBA. This is one of the best posts I've seen on the matter, it's by a blogger and it's over a year old. Why can't newsrooms create similar content? How about top 10 CBA myths (e.g. players with NMC can't be bought out; injured players don't count against the cap; etc.). Since the signing of the CBA has the frequency of offer sheets to RFAs increased? What steps can clubs take to protect their RFAs (e.g. team initiated arbitration)? With Wellwood and Stajan as the Leafs main RFAs, what odds do agents and other insiders give that another club will tender them a contract? How does the fact that the Leafs traded their second round pick to Phoenix for (gulp!) Perreault, limit their ability to tender RFA offer sheets?
   
8. More on the Big Picture. Where does Leafs management sit on the the Moneyball vs. "Intangibles" spectrum? I've read great stuff about the San Jose Sharks and Columbus Blue Jackets innovative use of statistics. What are the Leafs up to? What do they make of this? On another topic: how does player development work, why is Buffalo so amazing at it and what are the Marlies doing to help develop Leaf prospects?
   
9. More on the Business of Sport: What has the impact of moving the farm club to Toronto been? What do players who played both in St. John's and at the Ricoh think of the move? Crunch the numbers - what has it meant for the salary cap being able to send guys across the street? Has it had any impact on the Leafs ability to recruit and retain management? With precedents in Chicago and Philadelphia is this a model we should expect to see more of? How does the Leafs system compare with clubs that don't have their own AHL affiliate? On-glass advertising, are the Leafs for or against? Same goes with advertising on jerseys, where does MLSE stand?

As Leaf/hockey fans, I'd love to know what stories do you think we're missing out on and what type of coverage would you like to see more of?

If you were the editor/producer for a day what would you tell your reporters to work on?

Are there any guys out there who stand out? Anyone a must-read for you?

Take one step and miss the whole first rung

The Leafs 6-2 loss to the Snoozin' Bruins may help answer a question that has puzzled me since February 26: how many must-win games can one team actually lose? Based on the season to date and the attendant media nonesense, my guess is three, maybe four.

The Leafs coughing up six (rather ugly) goals to the Bruins marks the first time Boston has potted a six-spot since November. It may also mark a very sad day at the CBC. With the Leafs out of the playoffs, I foresee mass layoffs down at the CBC and a move to a 24 hour cycle of nothing but Mr. Dressup, the Friendly Giant, Trouble with Tracy and King of Kensington re-runs.

As for the draft v. playoff-drive debate: the Leafs are six points out with five games to go. More importantly, the Leafs are five up on the Islanders who sit in 26th - the final spot that has a (remote) shot at winning the draft lottery.

If I were coach or GM, it would clearly be Raycroft time (hint: scan down to 75th spot to find him).

Fire Maurice

Who thinks it's a good idea to double shift Tucker and Blake in the final 3 minutes and put them back out on the ice with less than a minute to go?

Anybody?

Can I get a show of hands?

Seriously.

My mother-in-law knows better than to throw that mess of a line out late in a game and she thinks the Kansas City Scouts or maybe the Golden Seals are the teams to beat this year.

Off the top of my head, this line combination has now given-up last minute game losing goals against New Jersy, Boston, and Tampa.

I'm speechless.

One more chance to get it all wrong

No matter where you set the points bar to qualify for the post-season in the East (does it really matter if it's 89 or 93 points?) the Leafs can pretty much lose no more than two, maybe three games the rest of the season if they want to make it to the post-season dance.

The way this season has gone, two losses is pretty much an average week, week-and-a-half in Leaf land.

Clearly the playoffs are a pipe dream - as they have been since the all-star break - sixteen wins in your first 43 games will do that to a team.

I don't think missing the playoffs is the worst part of this season (yeah, it stings) - what's worse is what the Leafs are doing with their prospects.

Why on earth is Tlusty playing four to six minutes a night? He got a single shift in the second period against the Devils. He's averaging five shifts a game. Is it just me? Why is this kid even in the NHL?

I know he's just an injury fill-in, but Jeremy Williams had just one shift in the second and a single shift in the third.

Stalman got a more respectable 14:35 of ice time.

Is this any way to develop and evaluate talent?

Hopefully, someone near and dear to the coaching and player development staff will find a calculator and do the post-season math for them. Once the Leafs are officially-officially eliminated from the playoffs, I hope Maurice just lets the kids play.

The rest of the team couldn't carry the mail this year, the playoffs aren't going to happen, clearly it's time to give the kids plenty of ice time to see what they're capable of.

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.

Team Softness = Injuries?

At the conclusion of last year's season, JFJ and MLSE threw around the meme that the Leafs "lost the most man games in the NHL due to injury" like JFJ threw around no-movement and no trade clauses.

At the time, I had a big problem with that that statement as:

1. I hate excuses (I think what-ifs and excuses were the cornerstones of the JFJ era)
2. If you look at the bulk of last year's injuries, they were to fringe players (Wozniewski was 17% of the total; 4th liners and Marlies were another 22%)
3. Good teams find ways to win, even when their big guys are hurting

What I didn't stop to consider was why the Leafs were so banged up.

After getting physically manhandled by Washington two nights in a row, the Leafs are once again threatening to run away with the injury title. It struck me that maybe the Leafs suffer so many injuries because they're a soft team.

Last year it was a sea of white shirts staring at their skate laces after Janssen laid out Kaberle.

The last two nights nobody laid a finger on Erskine and Eminger and the questionable hits (and one lovely end of game spear) kept on coming. Poni and Steen are both out as a result and White and Antropov were lucky to avoid the IR...

I'm far too lazy to crunch the numbers, but it would be interesting to see how many of the man games lost over the past 100+ games were the result of other teams playing big while the Leafs played small...

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.

A Different Approach

I don't mean to harp on the media contingent that covers the Leafs, but coming off the biggest win of the season you'd think some of the post-game coverage would include a modicum of insight or analysis into what the Leafs did differently Saturday night.

To my eyes, it looked like Coach Maurice moved away from his 2 man forecheck system and used a more conservative 1-2-2 approach. The extra forwards would cycle in if the Leafs gained possession or could clog up the neutral zone to take away the Sens' speed while providing more support for the oft-criticized Leaf D.

Two other big changes - McCabe and Kaberle were reunited and Maurice dramatically shortened his bench. The top 4 D played the vast majority of the game. Woz was limited to a season low seven minutes of ice-time and Kronwall logged 12 while McCabe played a whopping 30 minutes (and turned in his best game of the season so far).

If any of the dozens of media folks that routinely cover the Blue and White did ask the coaches or players about the short bench or the modified forecheck, the answers certainly didn't make it into any of the post-game coverage I saw.

It's too bad as I love to know the thinking/strategy behind the Leafs' big win and, more importantly, if this is a sign of things to come from the club.

Six Questions for the Coach

Questions for the Coach:

Question 1: Do you and JFJ discuss player personnel and what type of players you think this team needs to win?

Last season, it was explicitly clear that Maurice had no confidence whatsoever in Aubin and played the snot out of Raycroft (despite getting sub-par results from your 'tender of choice).

No alternate for Aubin was ever found, no competent back-up was brought in to spell Raycroft or even stop the bleeding during one of the teams' bigger losing streaks. Aubin stayed nailed to the bench while Raycroft laid down on the ice watching puck after puck sail over his left shoulder.

I'd suggest that the failure to address the back-up goaltending situation/ provide some relief for Raycroft was a huge factor in missing the playoffs by a single point.

Question 1A: Can you comment on that without using a punchline? No, I'm not kidding...I'd like a straight answer...

Question 2: When you and JFJ discuss player personnel and the type of players you think this team needs to win, is the answer ever Wozniewski?

I'd like to suggest that Wozniewski is the anti-Aubin.

He's clearly not a competent blue liner (a minus 1 tonight, on for two goals against; minus 4 in his last six games; leading the team in minor penalties by a wide margin and he's horrific on the PK with a SHGA/60 approaching -12) yet, unlike Aubin, Maurice plays the snot out of him (20 minutes tonight; 17 minutes a game on average this season).

Question 3: Why does Wozniewski continue to see time on the PK?

Question 4: You have six defencemen, why on earth was Wozniewski on the ice in a tie game with one minute to go?

Question 5: If you continue to get these results, don't you think it's time to take a different approach to player personnel?

Question 6: In a 3 on 3 in OT, what was the thinking behind icing two of your slower skating players (Antropov, McCabe) to start the extra frame?

Gonna Get Your Mind Right

Cool Hand Luke is one of my all time favourite movies. In fact, I wear #37 on my hockey jersey as it's Paul Newman's number in the chain gang.

That movie has taught me a lot of life lessons: while it may be possible for a man to eat 50 hardboiled eggs, you're better off if you're not that guy; one of the most important things to know is your own mind; the Flaming Lips can pretty much cover any song and it will be cool; it's not a good idea to box with a guy the size of George Kennedy and, most importantly, you can pretty much break any person's spirit by making them repeatedly dig and then re-fill a grave-sized hole in the hot southern sun, especially when their only reprieve is a night spent in "the box" (a closet sized, outdoor, solitary confinement unit).

I bring this up because I think the whole night in the box and repetitive hole digging will be my new answer to the question, "What the $%@!# can be done with the Leafs?"

Seriously.

Consider...

The next time Kubina chases his man on the PK up to the blue line, he'll spend a night in the box.

The next time Hal Gill thinks it's a good idea to lead the rush, it's a night in the box.

Raycroft even thinks about going down early - that's right - it's a night in the box.

In addition to helping my beloved Blue and White "get their mind right" (as the Captain in Cool Hand Luke so wonderfully puts it) repeatedly digging and re-filling a hole would make for great post-game visuals.

Need to know who's in the doghouse? Just look for the guy with a haunted look heading out to the ACC parking lot holding a shovel.

Think the Sens look goofy doing post-games on stationary bikes? Wait until you see the Woz, night after night, waist deep in the ground, surrounded by soil down on Bremner Boulevard.

So what if the players and their union don't like it - the NHLPA is such a mess that now is the time to strike...a few weeks of hole digging and sleeping outside and this team will be playing at least .510 hockey.

=+=+=+=+=+=

On Atlanta's fourth goal it was so nice to see Hal Gill try to lead the rush. Not sure what part of keeping the game simple and concentrating on defence-first that falls under, but those big juicy brains down at MLSE sure have some interesting ideas. Now that's some coachin'

It was also heartwarming that Jason Blake watched the play and then turned away from his check on that goal. Sometimes players take a while to fit in with their new organization, to change cultures and to really show that they are part of their new team. But that piece of lazy backchecking coupled with a missed assignment is all I need to see to know that Jason is now officially and firmly a part of the Blue and White. Welcome Jason!

On the good news front - is Antropov the biggest surprise of this NHL season? I got him late in my pool for just $0.30 and it's making me look like a genius.

How Low Can You Go?

Nice to see this organization adapt and learn from past mistakes.

Last year, the team blew a lead late in Buffalo and it was clear the coach should have called a time-out. This season, the team blows it again in Buffalo and the coach doesn't call a time out.

I wonder if it will be as refreshing as it was last year when Maurice steps up with his media Mea Culpa later this week.

==========

I once played on a baseball team that was so bad that the catcher was not allowed to throw the ball back to the pitcher. After every pitch (that wasn’t knocked into the outfield or bounced off some poor batter’s ass) the pitcher would walk towards home and the catcher would walk towards the mound, they’d meet half-way, exchange the ball and repeat until the 9th batter came up each inning or the down-by-11-runs mercy rule came into effect.

When there was a guy on third base that was a threat to steal home, the catcher would sit on home plate with the ball in his glove until the ump would get so fed up he'd forbid the kid on third from stealing home just so the game could resume.

Oh, and the team was sponsored by a discount cigar store.

Sadly, I’m not making this up.

This is the anecdote that came to mind after tonight’s game in Buffalo (that and maybe, just maybe, if the Leafs can recruit a hotshot motorcycle riding tough guy played by a young Jackie Earle Haley, they might have a shot at turning this young season around…)

Is there a hockey equivalent to sitting on home plate and only walking the ball back to the pitcher? Well, if ever there was a team in need of such a defensive stratagem it’s the 1974 Washington Capitals who gave up 446 goals Leafs.

The Leafs have coughed up 29 goals against in just seven games and a whopping 11 goals in the third period (good for 29th in the league).

Now, I hear you - in fairness to the Leafs, they have already played dressed for seven games this year, so the totals are a bit high - it would be more accurate to look at goals against average, so let's re-do the math.

The Leafs have given up 4.14 goals per game - good for 28th overall in the NHL (see, by averaging it out we made it much better - to 28th from 29th).

What about if we look at the Leafs on a per-period average? Well, it’s…um, it’s still pretty frickin glum:
1 period GAA 1.00 (23rd)
2 period GAA 1.14 (19th)
3 period GAA 1.57 (25th)

If that wasn't bad enough, the Penguins are 27th in GAA and they're giving up half a goal less than the Leafs each game. You know it’s not a good sign when you’re looking to Michel Therien for defensive coaching insights...

chamomile nation

As I watched that debacle tonight, it struck me that maybe someone filled the Leafs' water bottles with some sleepy time tea. The stuff that Maurice has suggested fans stock up on.

I only watched the first two periods. Just like most of the Leafs, I didn't stick around for the third but I'll weigh in anyways...

Is anyone really surprised that the Leafs are 1-3 to start the season? I mean other than those fans who can't quite keep the shift key held done when talking about the Leafs!!!!1

Consider:

The 2006-07 Leafs were 25th in goals against.

The six D who were logged the most minutes for the Leafs last season:
1. McCabe
2. Kaberle
3. Kubina
4. Gill
5. White
6. Colaiacovo

The 6 D logging the most minutes this season:
1. Kaberle
2. Kubina
3. McCabe
4. Gill
5. Wozniewski
6. White

Last season, the Leafs were short handed the 11th most in the NHL. To keep it entertaining, the Leafs ran the PK like an old episode of Show Down, with the space around Raycroft’s glove filling in for the big foam targets. The Leafs PK (which might have benefited had it been coached by Peter Puck) ended up 27th in the NHL in 2006-07.

Top 8 in PK minutes last season:
1. Gill
2. McCabe
3. Kilger
4. Kaberle
5. Kubina
6. Steen
7. Stajan
8. Peca

Top 8 in PK minutes this season:
1. Gill
2. Kubina
3. McCabe
4. Kilger
5. Wozniewski
6. Devereaux
7. Stajan
8. Antropov

For those of you keeping score, you might be noticing a pattern here. In fact, 20 of the 23 players on the Leafs 2006-07 roster returned for the 2007-08 season, as did the entire coaching staff.

So where was this change going to come?

Toskala, Bell and Blake?

Really?

A career back-up, a third-line centre (who's been suspended for almost a fifth of the season) and a small forward (who's just been diagnosed with a form of cancer).

If that's the answer to what ails this club (and here's the question: how do you fix a team with a woeful inability to keep the puck out of their own net, discipline problems and a PK that puts "special ed" back into special teams?) Paul Maurice is going to need to get a plantation worth of chamomile tea for Leafs Nation.

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?

The Failure(s) of MLSE

Odds are sometime Saturday night or Sunday afternoon when this year's Leaf team is officially eliminated from the post-season, all the usual excuses will come out: the list of players who are playing injured, the guys who were playing over their heads.

Sub-heads will intone, The most man games lost to injury this season (never mind that 100+ of those games are Woz and Peca; this is a team played better with Tucker injured than healthy).

JFJ and Coach Mo will be quoted about how this team of great young guys just ran out of gas.

There will be the usual talk of holding heads high, that this team was expected to be in a dog fight for the playoffs and they took right up until the final game of the season. Right to game 82.

Well, don't believe it.

The playoffs were there for the Leafs to grasp and this team just blew it.

There shouldn't be any excuses when this team comes to clean out their lockers.

This team was most notable for playing as if there would always be one more chance. One more must-win game that they could lose before playing the next one. In a fight for their lives they went an unremarkable and uninspiring 5 and 5 down the stretch.

The best this team could do was play five hundred hockey when it mattered most and that's not good enough.

Losing to Washington 5-1? Blowing lead after lead against the Habs (and then losing in the shootout). The total and utter collapse against the Sabres. Losing to an AHL goalie in Long Island. The Leafs coughed up at least five points the in the past ten games. Those five points would put the Leafs sixth in the east. A post-season lock.

I know the Leafs haven't been eliminated yet and there's still a chance for them to make the post-season, but it certainly didn't need to play out this way (and it certainly isn't looking likely that they'll be in the post-season dance).

That's why when those excuses from the players, coaches and MLSE hit the papers, get repeated on call in shows and fill up message boards, I hope people will question them.

I hope Leafs fans will wonder why nothing was done to solidify the goaltending. Telly dealt and Aubin ignored while Raycroft tumbled along with the 32nd worst goals against average and the 35th worst save percentage. A tendency to go down early combined with a weak glove hand exposed for every team to see.

Ask why the PK was allowed to slide from 17th to 27th without management making any moves.
Ask why the club didn't move O'Neill at the deadline when they scratched him for the final dozen games.

Ask the coaching staff about team discipline (7th most penalties in the NHL - not a good combo with the 27th worst PK) and the inability to hold a lead (22nd worst record in the NHL when leading after 2).

Most importantly, ask yourself if this: is the management team you trust to turn this ship around.

There was a dog fight to end this season, and with one game left to go, this team played like dogs.

They have one last chance to put off those excuses, we'll see what they're made of on Saturday night.

Ten Things I've been thinking about lately...

10. I realize Maurice has more hockey knowledge in just one of those deep dark circles under his eyes than I will ever hope to acquire no matter how much hockey I watch, but as the Leafs game went up like a four alarm blaze in Tonawanda, why didn't Maurice call a time-out or swap out Raycroft? Anything to stop the bleeding. Instead, wave after wave of Sabres came at them, the Leafs got gut-punch crushed and Raycroft will have to be back between the pipes in 20 or so hours (watch that glove-hand Andy, it's a bitch).

9. I'm a little confused - the Leafs were supposed to be life and death to make the playoffs. The experts said it; the coach said it; many fans said it and the GM may have even said it. So what's with the injury story angle? If the Leafs were healthy, are we to believe they'd be protecting these leads, winning in shoot-outs, not choking? Only Peca's hurt at the moment and this team still looks like a 10 spot club or worse...

8. When discussing the Perrault deal, why do so many fans think Bell would have been lost to waivers? At the Trade deadline, the Leafs had the flexibility to acquire one player without having to pass anyone through waivers. Once the trade deadline passes, there is no roster limit (CBA 16.4a). If Bell was going to be lost to waivers (and there's no knowing if this is true or not) the earliest he would have been lost is October 2007. Seven months after the trade deadline. FWIW, Bell has more points since the trade than Perrault, although he's getting about twice the ice-time of Perrault (and what's up with #94 logging 6 to 10 minutes/game?)

7. It seems common knowledge that Ferguson will be fired if the Leafs miss the playoffs again this year (here, here, hell - everywhere) but I've never found a source for this. Does any one have a citation on this? A quote from Peddie, Tannenbaum or anyone at MLSE? I have a bad feeling Ferguson has at least another year left in him. I guess MLSE wants at least one more trade deadline to pass so they can sit on their hands.

6. The polarizing effect of Raycroft. He's not as good as the wins total crowd would have you believe (check out his total losses, his win percentage and the shoot-out wins compared to Eddie and Cujo) and on the other hand he's not as dreadful as some of the stats might suggest (his ES SV% is solid; his PK SV% is lower than a Sens fan's self-esteem each June.) Would he be such a divisive figure if he wasn't a JFJ acquisition and if the price paid for him wasn't so high?

5. If the Refs really had a bias against the Leafs, wouldn't they be the most penalized team in the league, not the 7th most. Sometimes refs (Hello Kerry Fraser!) are just the suck, no matter what colour jersey the teams happen to be wearing. And how on earth did Cola get away with that trip in the Jersey game if the zebras have it in for the Blue and White?

4. I always presumed the Leafs were bottom of the barrel at the shoot-out because of their shooters. Surprisingly, the shooters are decidedly average - ranked 16th overall - scoring at just a fraction less than the league average (a 0.8% difference). Raycroft's sv% on the shoot-out, on the other hand, is dipping towards the Caps' win percentage...

3. Why do fans bring up dumb things Leafs may have done when discussing the current rash of meat head plays in the NHL? What do any of Domi's past transgressions (Samuelson, Niedermayer, Arvedson, marital infidelity) have to do with what I might think of as appropriate discipline for Neil, Janssen, Simon and Tootoo?

2. What does this team really need in the off-season? Let me clarify that, what minor tinkering will MLSE undertake as part of their master plan? It's clear they can generate sufficient offence off the back-end (and there's such little flex with those contracts it seems the top 6 spots are locked down) but the club can't keep the puck out of their own net. Maybe a solid back-up goalie, someone that can eat PK minutes and a new special teams coach behind the bench to take a fresh approach to a moribund pk.

1. How many "must win" games can a team lose before the term must-win has no currency? Seems to me, the Leafs have lost three of the last four must-win games, which of course means Saturday night's match-up against the Sabres at the ACC is a must-win game.