10 Things I Miss About Maple Leaf Gardens

Last Friday marked the 10th anniversary of the last game at Maple Leaf Gardens. This weekend, the Leafs will hold a ceremony marking the anniversary of the first game ever played at the ACC.

Now I don't want to be one of those guys who hates everything that's new and improved and spends all his time pathetically wishing for the good old days. So I'll just say that the ACC is a corporate mausoleum where the real fans are almost entirely locked out by high ticket prices, empty suits close business deals while stuffing overpriced sushi into their soulless corporate faces, and Toronto's reputation as a hockey city goes to die a slow and lonely death.

Other than that, it's great.

But this post isn't about the ACC. It's about Maple Leaf Gardens.

I didn't get to spend a lot of time at the Gardens as a kid. My dad would try to get the company tickets once or twice a year, usually as a Christmas gift. I probably made it out to maybe 20 or 30 games there in my life.

But I miss the place. I miss everything about it.

So at the risk of being a cranky old man, here are ten things I miss about the Gardens. Not ten players or ten moments -- there are others who could do those subjects more justice than I ever could. No, this is just ten obscure things that made the place great.

10 - The escalator

If you had seats in the greens or greys, you needed to take the escalator to get to your seats. That could a challenge since the Gardens escalators were about 18 inches wide, and were apparently operated by two skinny guys in the basement slowly cranking a giant stone wheel.

If you were a little kid, you'd be bounced and jostled around by the grownups until you emerged at the top, then squeeze your way through the crowd until you found an opening. And then you'd catch your first glimpse of the scoreboard, the crowd, the ice. And you realized you, wow, were actually at Maple Leaf Gardens.

9 - Whatever that was on the roof

If you ever sat in the last few rows at the Gardens, you got a good look at the roof since it somehow blocked your view of the ice even though that should be architecturally impossible. And you wondered: what the hell is that strange, off-white foamy substance covering everything?

Does anybody know? Was it some sort of ancient fire protection? Or was it some sort of organic substance that just grew out of control, like mold in a forgotten cupboard? I had a friend who climbed up to touch it once. Is it safe to assume he died a horrible death shortly after?

8 - Banana Joe

"Banana" Joe Lamantia was the crusty old penalty timekeeper at the Gardens. Back in the 80s, fights that started on the ice would occasionally spill into the penalty box as players shouted, threatened, and threw water bottles at each other. Banana Joe could always be found in the middle of the action.

During one game in the 80s, he was hit in the head with a puck. Not one to miss a day of work, he spent the next several games wearing a helmet. There was just something about the Gardens -- even the timekeepers were tough.

7 - The shot clocks

The shot clocks at the Gardens were located at either end, behind the nets above the gold seating. If you had the right seats in the Blue section, you could rest your drink on top of them. And of course, in between was a long stretch where a narrow ad could fit.

To this day, I can't see a Yellow Pages logo without thinking "Man, I can't believe the Leafs had 60 shots against Cujo in game one".

6 - The Mickey Mouse hands

Here's what I know about the Gardens scoreboard: it was about 16x16 resolution, had four colors, and was presumably run off of a borrowed Vic 20. It had a few pixels that were always on, even if the scoreboard was supposed to black. And it had maybe four animations that it would cycle through all game long.

My favorite was the clapping hands. Whenever the scoreboard operator wanted noise, he'd fire up his trusty animation of two white-gloved hands banging semi-rhythmically together. Picture Mickey Mouse half-heartedly trying to kill a fruit fly and you'll have the general idea. This was somebody's idea of firing up a crowd.

Did it work? Of course it did. We were Leaf fans in the 80s, it didn't take much to impress us.

5 - The Nachos

Let's get this out of the way first: the nachos at sporting events today suck. They do. Just stale chips piled into a plastic cup with a baggy of lukewarm cheese goo. If you like them, there's something wrong with you and I don't really want you reading this blog anymore.

But the Gardens... the Gardens had real sports nachos. (And yes, "sports nachos" in an official culinary category, separate from real nachos.) Sure, the chips were still stale, but there wasn't any lukewarm cheese goo. No, the Gardens had boiling hot cheese goo. And they didn't drizzle it into some fancy side pocket -- they dumped it over the chips with a ladle until you begged them to stop.

And Gardens nachos weren't served in a plastic container. They were served in a flimsy cardboard box that had holes in each side, so the lava-hot cheese goo could drip onto your hands and leave you with third-degree napalm burns.

And you weren't done yet. Have you ever asked for salsa on your nachos at a sporting event these days? The kid behind the counter probably tripped a secret alarm to alert the manager. But at the Gardens, you could have as much salsa (or jalapenos!) as you wanted. It was all right there in a little serve-yourself bowl next to the concession stand. Sure, some drunk had probably spilled half a beer in there by the time you arrived. That made it better!

By the time you got back to your seat, you had a leaky box full of soggy chips that had melted and then congealed together, a potent salsa/cheese goo mix, a pile of jalapenos that you'd regret for the rest of the night, and at least one hand that would need an emergency skin graft after the game.

Good god, I'm hungry right now.

4 - The ushers

Yes, I'm sure the ACC has ushers -- or, as they're probably known now, "seating area customer service representatives".

But the Gardens had real ushers: old men in uniforms who would take your ticket stub, wave in the general direction of your seat, and go back to watching the warmup. After all, most of them were retired guys who'd taken the job so that they could watch the Leafs for free. They were probably the biggest Leaf fans in the building.

Anyone remember the one guy who would run down just as the camera focused on the crowd whenever the Leafs scored a big goal, pumping his fist and slamming his hands together with joy? Sure, he probably trampled a few kids on his way down the aisle after an overtime winner. That's what they get for being in the trolley tracks.

3 - "And now, Jimmy Holmstrom at the organ."

There's no room for organists in today's NHL. No, that would mean interrupting the steady stream of sponsor messages and hot dog cannons and screeching rinkside hostesses and early 90s techno that blares through every second of downtime.

The Gardens didn't have that. It had Jimmy Holmstrom at the organ.

Back before their was such a thing as a mashup, Jimmy Holmstrom would play a version of Van Halen's "Jump" combined with Deep Purple's "Smoke On The Water" as the teams circled the ice before the opening faceoff. I was too young to even know those were real songs, so I assumed he had made the whole thing up on his own. I think the first time I heard "Smoke On The Water" at a party years later, I thought it was some rock band covering Jimmy Holmstrom. In fact, I probably said that out loud to try to impress a girl, then spent the rest of the night playing NHL92 in a corner.

My point is this: I would trade the entire contents of my ipod for an mp3 of Holmstrom's Jump/Smoke medley right now.

2 - Camera shakes

Because the Gardens was built in the 30s, it hadn't been designed with the needs of a TV crew in mind. And since Harold Ballard was a cheap SOB who wasn't going to spend a penny more than he needed to just to make fans happy, the Gardens was always a bit of a challenge for broadcasters. There wasn't a good spot for the TV cameras, so they wedged them in wherever they could find enough room.

Occasionally, when the Leafs scored a big goal or there was a fight or Wendel Clark looked at somebody sideways, Leaf fans would rise to their feet and block the camera. If they stayed on their feet, the broadcast would have to switch to the upper-deck camera (which is why the endings of so many Leaf playoff games seem to have been shot from a helicopter).

And if something happened that was so exciting that fans literally jumped out of their seats, well, whoever was sitting directly under the camera stand would wind up with a concussion, and viewers would see the camera shake and zig zag all over until the cameraman could get it under control again.

Check out Gilmour's OT goal against the Blues for a famous example of the classic Gardens shaky cam.

1 - Paul Morris

With apologies to Bob Cole and Joe Bowen, long-time Leafs PA announcer Paul Morris was the voice of Maple Leaf Gardens. His distinctive nasally voice was a Gardens trademark.

Two things you need to know about Paul Morris:

1. He didn't take shortcuts. When it came to announcing penalties, Morris announced everything. There was none of this "double minor" or "five minutes each for fighting". No, Morris announced each individual penalty, line by line. If that meant that he had to talk for 20 straight minutes after a bench clearing brawl, then that's what he did.

2. He never raised his voice. Ever. It didn't matter if it was the first period of a pre-season game or the dying moments of a game seven, Paul Morris had his monotone and he stuck with it. It was his trademark, so much so that every Leaf fan during the 80s and 90s has done an impression of Morris dispassionately announcing a Wendel Clark Stanley Cup winning goal. Yes, every single one of us.

Even through the 90s, as other PA announcers worked to outdo each other with hyperbole and gimmicks, Paul Morris was a true professional. The Leafs still have him do spot duty from time-to-time. If they ever make it to a Cup final, I hope they let him work the final game.

So that's my list. I know I've left plenty of great memories out. The blue and white silhouetted players at the College Station subway stop... watching Coach's Corner in the concourse with 100 other fans... Harold Ballard posting pro-Ticat, anti-Argo messages on the scoreboard during intermission...

I miss the place. We'll never see another building like it.

Lie to me

The secret of success is sincerity. Once you can fake that you've got it made. --Jean Giraudoux

Say what you will about Ron Wilson and Brian Burke, but we know one thing: they're honest.

If they like you, they'll say so. If not, they'll say that too. And for the most part, that's been a breath of fresh air for Leaf Nation.

The John Ferguson/Paul Maurice era was marked by a relentlessly cynical optimism. Ferguson always liked the team, no matter how bad they looked on paper. Maurice famously thought they were going to make the playoffs and compete for a Cup. And the players always claimed they were just one bad bounce away from being really good.

Burke and Wilson came in started to tell it like it is. I loved it.

But here's the thing about honesty. It's not always the ...

Crap, wait a second, I just remember my wife reads this blog sometimes, and she won't like what I'm about to say. Um, hold on.

Hi honey! Say, have you seen the highlights from the Puppy Bowl? Weren't those little guys adorable? They were so just so scrappy!

OK, now that she's gone, let me get back to my point.

Here's the thing about honesty: it's not always the best policy. Sometimes, telling the truth just for the sake of it is dumb. And Ron Wilson and Brian Burke have been treading into that territory in recent weeks.

First, a little history. From the very start, Ron Wilson has refused to sugarcoat the quality of the roster. He told us in September that the team wouldn't be very good, and he's been proven right. When guys like Matt Stajan, Jason Blake and Tomas Kaberle weren't playing at the level they needed to, Wilson didn't worry about protecting anyone's feelings. He made each guy accountable, the way a good coach should (and bad coaches don't).

When Brian Burke joined the fold, he kept the honesty flowing. He didn't try to shine up a turd.

All that honesty created an atmosphere of accountability for a team that had been missing it for years. Suddenly, a locker room that had become used to being treated with kid gloves had to deal with a stiff dose of reality. Not everyone responded, but most did. And a willingless to tell the cold hard truth meant that when a player did hear praise, they knew they'd earned it.

As recently as a few weeks ago, Wilson and Burke called out goalie Vesa Toskala for his poor practice habits. Good. Toskala's a veteran and he's paid to play at a high level. If he's not committed to doing so, he should hear about.

But recently, Wilson and Burke have gone too far. And now, they may be hurting the team.

First, there was Burke's bizarre announcement that he wasn't interested in resigning Nik Antropov. While there's no doubt Burke meant what he said, his honesty probably didn't accomplish anything beyond lowering Antropov's trade value.

Next up was Dominic Moore. A few days ago, Wilson said that fans were getting "carried away" with Moore's production, and pointed out that he wouldn't be good enough to have the same sort of offensive numbers on a better team. "Scoring points on a really bad team, that's really all it is," Wilson said.

Was Wilson wrong? Probably not. But why dismiss Moore's accomplishments right before the trade deadline? And beyond that, Moore is a long-time fourth-liner who's about to taste unrestricted free agency after a career year -- what kind of coach publicly cuts a guy down under those circumstances?

Then came today's comments from Burke about rookie goalie Justin Pogge. "He has not earned the right to be here," Burke said, going on to explain that Pogge was getting NHL starts primarily to try to motivate Toskala even though the kid didn't really belong in the big leagues.

Again, brutally honest and probably 100% correct. But Pogge is a borderline prospect having an underwhelming AHL season, forced to audition for an NHL role behind a terrible defensive team. He'd hardly be human if his confidence wasn't already shakey. What possible good can come from hearing his GM cut him down to size on the radio?

For the life of me, I can't figure out what these two are thinking with some of the recent comments. So I'll take a cue from Wilson and Burke and try a little honesty myself: They sound like two guys who have suddenly become a little too interested in the sound of their own voices, and have forgotten that they're here to win.

Winning over the media folks who love a good sound bite doesn't go very far towards building a contending team. But a little bit of well-placed B.S. just might.

Lie to me, guys. Or at least play the part of the good husband, and learn when to change the subject.

I may have made a slight miscalculation on this whole Jason Blake thing

There's something you should know about me. When it comes to the Leafs, I'm wrong. A lot.

I've only been blogging for about a year. Which is good thing, because if I'd been around much longer then there would be post in the archives with titles like "Paul Maurice is a perfect hire for the Leafs" and "Rask, Smchask - Why the Raycroft deal is a steal of the Ferguson and the Leafs".

Which brings us to Jason Blake.

It's quite possible that, when it comes to Blake, I was wronger than I've ever been wrong about anything, ever.

Here's a little secret. I keep a short list of posts that I plan on writing, usually with a few notes and sometimes with whole sections pre-written. That way, when things are slow in Leafland or I'm too busy to put any time into something, I can still go find something to post about.

I've had a post on my list all season called "Jason Blake is Playing Great" that I was saving for the weeks leading up to the deadline. It was going to be a long post about how well Blake was playing, how his stats didn't show his true impact, how he was doing all the little things right and making everyone around him better and how with a little bit better luck he'd have fantastic stats.

Then, about an hour after posting that, I was going to do a shorter post with the punch line: that the "Blake is Great" post was a fake, and that Leaf fans should all start writing similar stuff in various places in a co-ordinated effort to fool some dumb fanbase into deciding they wanted him. And then we could be rid of this useless player and his terrible contract. It was worth a shot, right?

Well, let's just say I don't think I'll be writing that post now. Because somehow, some way, in the past two months it's all come true.

Jason Blake is one of the best players in the NHL right now.

I keep reading that last sentence, but my brain can not comprehend it.

But it's true. With a glove tap to article1 over at PPP, here's how Blake compares to Alex Ovechkin in 2009:

Ovechkin - 18GP 13G 9A 22Pts EV
Blake - 19 GP 13G 10A 23Pts +9

I mean... how is this... what could it... gah.

One month ago, I did a mid-season value ranking of all the Leafs, and I had Blake dead last. As in, behind Curtis Joseph and Ryan Holweg. Here's what I wrote:

His play has picked up modestly lately, but he's still a borderline third-liner on any decent team. Given his age and production curve, his contract has to be among the worst in the league.

See? Like I told you, I have the ability to be really, really wrong.

I'd always held out hope that Blake could do enough this year to be worth a trade at the deadline. Not because we'd get anything good in return, but because we could unload his long-term contract and clear up cap space. That was my absolute best possible scenario.

I think we may have gone beyond that. I think it may be time to stop asking if the Leafs can trade Blake, and start wondering how much they can get for him.

At this point, if you're a contender, how do you not want to trade for Jason Blake? Even if this year is a fluke and he falls off a cliff in the off-season, you still get an amazing player for the playoff run. You keep him for another year after that, and then buy him out for a relatively cheap $5.5M spread over four season. That doesn't sound so bad, does it? And that's the worst case.

I'll go one further: if you're a contending team, how do you not want to land Blake and linemate Dominic Moore? The two have been a perfect match, and Moore has 17 points in his past 13 games. We thought Moore was having a career year over the first few months, but it turns out he was just warming up.

Brian Burke should be asking a fortune for speedy center. Which would make it the second time he's put a price on a Moore's head.

(Too soon? OK, moving on.)

Through this entire Blake streak, I've stayed low key. I knew it was all a fluke and he'd go back to being his old, lazy, waste-of-a-roster spot self any day now. But something changed this week. I think it was during the Tampa Bay game, when Blake had a partial breakaway and I was absolutely stunned that he didn't score. I had already counted the goal in my head, because after all, this was the unstoppable Jason Blake.

So I take back all the negative value ratings and "harmless wrist shot" jokes and fake posts that never were. I'm on the bandwagon. I have no idea how this is happening, but Jason Blake is dominating the NHL right now and I'm loving every second of it.

You know, for two more weeks. Right up until Burke trades him at the deadline for a nice little return.

And you can bank on that, because I'm never wrong.

Great Obscure Moments in Leafs History - That time Mike Foligno kicked Curtis Joseph in the face

Great Obscure Moments in Leafs History - An ongoing series to honor the greatest, completely meaningless moments in Toronto Maple Leaf history.

Curtis Joseph has had an up-and-down history with the Toronto Maple Leafs.

There was his amazing acrobatics against the Leafs in the 1993 playoffs. He was on the receiving end of the Gilmour spinarama and the Wendel waster. He signed with the Leafs in 1999 and lead them to ten playoff rounds in four years. He ripped out Leaf fans' hearts by defecting to the Red Wings in 2002. Then he returned this year for a final season.

And, of course, there was today's obscure moment: that time Mike Foligno kicked him in the face.

Now, if you're too young or didn't really follow the Leafs back then, you probably hear "Mike Foligno kicked Curtis Joseph" and think "Hm, Cujo must have been scrambling for a rebound, and Foligno skated in and accidentally nudged him with a skate."

Artist's conception

And you would be wrong. No, Mike Foligno skated in at full speed and round-house kicked Curtis Joseph. In the face. Chuck Norris style.

Here's the setup: It's the second round of the 1993 playoffs. Less than 48 hours after Borschevsky's goal to eliminate the Red Wings, the Leafs are hosting St. Louis at the Gardens.

The game turned out to be a classic, and was tied 1-1 after regulation. Felix Potvin was solid, but the story of the game was Blues goalie Curtis Joseph. He was unbelievable, seemingly robbing the Leafs on every shift with increasingly spectacular saves. The Leafs would end up taking over 60 shots in the game, but Joseph seemed unbeatable.

Midway through the first overtime, Gilmour cuts over the line and fires a wrist shot. Mike Foligno, who is playing on Gilmour's line because it's the playoffs and Gilmour is being quintuple-shifted, drives hard to the net as Garth Butcher reaches out an arm and twists him off-balance.

Foligno loses his balance, spins 360 degrees, and for some reason swings one foot out, squarely connecting upside Joseph's head. Joseph's mask pops straight up in the air, as Leaf fans hold their breath in hopes that his head might be in it. Joseph skates towards the bench with his gloves covering his face, possibly because the impact has temporarily allowed him to see into the future and read his 2008-09 stat line.

Some people forget this now, but a shaken up Joseph actually left the game for several minutes. That forced Blues backup Guy Hebert into the game, ice cold and mid-way through a playoff overtime. He ended up making an outstanding save on Mark Osborne to keep the game live until Joseph returned at the next stoppage.

Hebert is a footnote in the story now, but imagine the reaction if he'd lost that game. Blue fans still whine incessantly about the 1996 playoffs, just because Nick Kypreos intentionally snapped Grant Fuhr's ACL one little time. Imagine how mad they'd be in the Leafs had snuck one by Hebert while Joseph was having his head glued back on.

The game ended up going into a second overtime, where Doug Gilmour finally ended it on perhaps the greatest OT goal in NHL history. Joseph would go on to steal three games and nearly the series, before finally bowing out in a game seven blowout.

A few more thoughts on the moment:

• Fifteen years ago, a guy getting kicked in the face was pretty funny. If the same play happened today Pierre McGuire would demand a national inquiry, Damien Cox would insist that the NHL expand the crease to the size of the NBA's three point line, and Professor James Cullingham would call on the NHL to ban skates. Instead, we all made Street Fighter II jokes and moved on with our lives.
  
  
• Not really related to anything, but did you know that Guy Hebert was an American, and that his name was actually pronounced "Guy Hibbert"? People assumed he was french and called him "Gee Hee-bahr" for his entire career, and he just went with it. That cracks me up.
  
  
• I get a little too excited for Leafs/Sens games this year, just for the chance of some sort of encounter between Joseph and Nick Foligno. Would Foligno try to finish the job his dad started? Or even better, would Joseph be looking for revenge? Wouldn't you love to see Nick Foligno standing on the blueline during the national anthem, only to be super-kicked Shawn Michaels style by Joseph? What would the NHL do, suspend a guy who never plays anyways? Do it, Curtis!
  
  
• You know you're having a rough series when getting kicked by a hockey skate at full speed is only the second worst thing that happens to your face.
  
  
• When Nikolai Borschevsky gets his own talk show, and Pinky Finger sits next to the guests flipping them off, I want each interview to end with a flying Mike Foligno kick to the unsuspecting guest's head. Why is this show not on the air yet?
  

Here are ESPN's highlights of the game, the only footage I could find on youtube. The flying roundhouse comes at 1:20.

One year of Down Goes Brown

One year ago today, I decided to finally start blogging. I'd been thinking about it for months, and finally decided to just go ahead and do it. I figured it would be fun, even though I wasn't sure anyone would ever read it.

Twelve months and almost 100,000 page views later, it's still fun. And I'm still trying to figure out who exactly is reading (but hello to all of you in Malaysia, where apparently I'm huge).

It's been an interesting year. Here are some of the highlights...

Feb. 8, 2008 - The Leafs are terrible, but at least they just beat the Habs. DGB makes an understated debut with a short game recap of the Leafs win over Montreal. It takes exactly one paragraph to get to the first "Kyle Wellwood is fat" jokes.

Feb. 9, 2009 - One day into the blog's history, we get the first of roughly three dozen posts to feature the Stu Grimson video.

Feb. 12, 2008 - The first "Obscure Moments" feature, with an in-depth breakdown of the Ron MacLean-Nik Borchevsky interview. Readers begin to wonder if maybe I have too much time on my hands.

Feb. 20, 2008 - The infamous Russ Courtnall for John Kordic was a good trade post. This post has become the #1 Google result for most combinations of Kordic and Courtnall's name, and still drives hundreds of visitors to the site, none of whom agree with me.

Feb. 24, 2008 - Two days before the trade deadline, Mats Sundin announces he won't waive his no-trade clause. I begin writing anti-Sundin posts, a temporary phase that readers assume I'll grow out of quickly.

March 6, 2008 - I make the argument that the Leafs are the softest team in the NHL. Somewhere, Brian Burke nods sadly.

March 26, 2008 - Thanks to Patrick Roy's lunatic son, I write what still stands as the most popular post in DGB history: How To Fight When You Don't Want to Fight.

April, 2008 - Inspired by Mark Bell murdering Daniel Alfredsson, April somehow becomes Beat Up The Senators month. We have some fun at the expense of shameless Sen homers Bruce Garrioch and Don Brennan, and then point out that the Senators steal everyone's playoff traditions. And then, rock bottom for Sens fans: this happens.

May 6, 2008 - Stung by accusations of being too negative, I try to come up with 20 good things about the 07-08 Leafs. For some reason, commenters accuse me of being insincere.

May 26, 2008 - The second Great Obscure Moment - Everything that happened after the Clark/McSorley fight. Sadly, my quest to determine the identity of Pinky Finger remains unfulfilled.

June 20, 2008 - June is a slow month, both for the Leafs and the blog. I do get a chance to make fun of The Love Guru, though. The post is read by hundreds of people, making it more popular than the movie.

June 24 - Down Goes Brown wins Eklund's "Next Great Hockey Blogger" contest at hockeybuzz.

July 1 - Free agent signing day. The Leafs sign unheralded defenceman Jeff Finger, who I know nothing about. I ask the folks at the (now defunct) Avs blog In The Cheap Seats to write a guest post about him. Puck Daddy links to it, and confused Leaf fans flood the site for the biggest single-day traffic in the blog's history, by far. That's right, my all-time biggest traffic spike was due to a post I didn't write. I think that tells you something.

July 24 - DGB makes the New York Times, except they don't get the name quite right.

July 29 - I set out to name the Worst Leafs of All-Time. This ends up being a three-part series, after I edit it down from its original 100,000 words.

August 13 - I write a sympathetic post about how Mats Sundin should really wait until mid-season to return to the NHL, but clearly can't because he said he'd never be a rental and obviously he's a man of his word. Yeah. Keep your day job, Nostradamus.

August 31 - I give Bryan McCabe a rousing send-off on his last day as a Maple Leaf. To be honest, I was just angry that the Leafs had parted with McCabe, Wellwood and Raycroft within a few weeks. In the first six months of this blog, 80% of the writing consisted of the same three jokes: Wellwood is fat, McCabe scores in his own net, and Raycroft has no glove hand. That was it. I was terrified that I'd have nothing to write about.

September 14, 2008 - Spiralling into depression, I set out to answer the question: Is this the worse it's ever been? Spoiler alert: Yes.

September 22, 2008 - EA Sports releases a commercial for NHL 09 that features Kyle Wellwood. I'm thrilled, because I get to use up all my leftover Wellwood jokes in one post.

September 29, 2008 - Maple Leaf Media Cliche Bingo debuts. Fifteen seconds later, Damien Cox has filled in his card.

October 15, 2008 - I count down the Top 10 tough guys from the old Norris Division. The list ends up being somewhat anti-climactic, since all ten spots are awarded to Wendel Clark's various knuckles.

October 30, 2008 - Somebody who makes more money than him makes Howard Berger feel inadequate, so he takes out all his dashed aspirations on Leaf fans with a legendary post.

November 3, 2008 - I start writing about Wendel Clark, and don't stop for three weeks. The Top 17 Wendel Moments series dominates the site for the rest of the month, covering goals, hits, fights and more. We even find out who made the All Heart video.

November 19, 2008 - What's the difference between this blog and a hockey game in the southern US? This blog can sell out.

December 16, 2008 - I post about my most-wanted Maple Leaf collectibles. The entire post is just a thinly-veiled excuse to make some Al Iafrate jokes. God I wish I had a blog in the early 90s.

December 18, 2008 - Mats Sundin finally signs with the Canucks. I write a message to Mats, as well as an explanation of why Leaf fans are so mad at him. Somebody sends the link to Sundin, but it takes him two months to decide whether he wants to click on it.

December 23, 2008 - I write a humorous holiday post about throwing a dog into a furnace.

December 28, 2008 - I spend 15 minutes writing a post about who took out Matt Stajan, and three hours looking for angry soccer ball clipart on google.

January 10, 2009 - I officially give up on the season. Judging by the comments section, most of you were already there.

January 25, 2009 - I make a pro-fighting post, kicking off about two weeks straight of fighting debates on the site (including one with Damien Cox). Everyone pretends to be impressed by the depth of my research and the persuasiveness of my argument, while secretly wishing I'd just go back to making jokes about the 1990 Leafs.

January 26, 2009 - The Brian Burke twitter account appears, a fact that has absolutely nothing to do with this blog so why am I even mentioning it...

January 31, 2009 - I count down my personal top ten Doug Gilmour moments. While the old clips of goals and other highlights are fun, the post is most memorable for allowing me to finally create an "enrico ciccone" tag.

February 8, 2009 - Down Goes Brown celebrates its one year anniversary. The Leafs are terrible, but at least they just beat the Habs.

Thanks to everyone for reading and commenting. And a special thanks to those of you who've helped the blog grow by sending links to your friends and others who you think might enjoy it.

My only regret is that I didn't get started sooner. So if you're somebody like me -- a Leaf fan who likes to watch, talk and write about hockey -- and you don't have your own blog, why not start one? If I can do it, believe me, so can you.

Just stay away from Malaysia. That market is all mine.

Join us for a Habs/Leafs liveblog

I'll be liveblogging tonight's game over at TheScore.com. There was a good turnout for last week's Avs games, and tonight's should be a lot of fun with plenty of sub-plots to follow.

• Will Mikhail Grabovski and Sergei Kostitsyn continue their ongoing tickle-fight?
  
  
• Will Georges Laraque politely remind Brad May and Jamal Mayers to keep their helmets on before he pounds the crap out of them?
  
  
• How many soft goals will Toskala allow before Brian Burke rushes onto the ice and attacks him?
  
  
• Will I remember to stop talking about Jeff Brubaker and the Kordic/Courtnall trade long enough to actually mention the score or what's happening in the game?

Join us at 7:00 to find out.

Helmets and fighting: Georges Laraque has a point

An interesting twist in the fighting debate today, thanks to Habs enforcer Georges Laraque's comments about helmets in an interview with TSN. Predictably, Damien Cox is all over the interview, holding them up as further proof that fighting should be on the way out.

I've made my stance on the issue clear over the past few weeks: I'm pro-fighting, and I'm not embarrassed to admit it.

But while I want fighting to stay in the NHL (and would even love to see if go back to the higher levels of the early 90s), I don't believe that means it has to stay exactly as-is. In the wake of the Don Sanderson tragedy, the least the NHL can do is be open to ideas about how to make fighting safer.

Laraque suggests that players be banned from removing the helmets prior to a fight or from trying to remove an opponent's, and that fights be stopped as soon as a player's helmet comes off.

He may be on to something.

The idea isn't perfect. For one, it won't seem like such a great idea the first time a player breaks his hand on a helmet or visor. And NHL linesmen may have a thing or two to say about the idea of jumping in to stop a fight between two guys who are swinging for the fences because a helmet has popped off.

But at the very least, the idea is worth a look. Combine it with new rules about tighter chinstraps and the likelihood of a Sanderson situation in the NHL would drop to close to zero.

I'm less supportive of Laraque's other suggestion, that players with visors be barred from fighting at all. We already have extra rules in place to penalize a player with a visor who instigates a fight and perhaps those could be strengthened. But beyond that, players should have a choice as to whether or not to fight a guy with a shield.

If anything, banning players with visors from ever fighting could mean that guys who play a physical game and fight occasionally (like Jarome Iginla or Luke Schenn) might feel the need to lose their shields altogether. And with apologies to Don Cherry, that's the last thing we should want.

So kudos to Laraque for raising some new ideas. And let's hope his newfound pacifism extends to tomorrow night's Leafs/Habs game. If not... keep your helmet on, Brad May.

Fights per game since 1991

Several of you liked the recent post on NHL fighting frequency, but wanted to see an average fights/game number. The basic numbers I presented didn't account for the additional games played thanks to expansion and schedule tweaks.

Well, with a glove tap to commenter Leu' and the fine folks at the incredibly comprehensive dropyourgloves.com, here are the average fights per game each season since 1990:

1990-91 - 1.04
1991-92 - 1.02
1992-93 - 0.71
1993-94 - 0.85
1994-95 - 0.88
1995-96 - 0.80
1996-97 - 0.93
1997-98 - 0.87
1998-99 - 0.66
1999-00 - 0.57
2000-01 - 0.61
2001-02 - 0.70
2002-03 - 0.56
2003-04 - 0.70
2004-05 - No season
2005-06 - 0.41
2006-07 - 0.44
2007-08 - 0.59
2008-09 - 0.70 (projected)

And here's the graph:

So there you have -- a pretty clear downward trend, although one with a clear upswing in the past two years. Even this season's spike will still result in fewer fights per game than we saw ten+ years ago.

This doesn't tell us whether fighting is good or bad or indifferent. But can we at least all agree that fighting has been dropping over the past two decades? Even you, Damien?

Follow DGB on Twitter

I run into a lot of people who tell me "You know, I visit DGB everyday, I subscribe to the RSS feed, and I even joined the facebook page that you never update... but I just wish there were more ways to get spam from you!"

Well, you're in luck, because DGB is now on Twitter too. Follow DGB to get automatic updates whenever a new post goes up.

There's also a "Follow This Blog" widget over on the right-hand side of this page (scroll down). I'm not actually sure what that's about, but if you follow us through that it shows your picture at something like 4x4 pixels. Good times.

And if all that's not enough, e-mail me your address and I'll come over and pound on your bedroom window in the middle of the night every time I post something.

My Top 10 Dougie Moments

Back in November, when the Leafs honored Wendel Clark by raising his #17 to the rafters, I spent the entire month huddled in a remote cabin typing non-stop. The end result was the Top 17 Wendel Moments list, which is currently being bound into a 32-volume series that will be sold door-to-door. I may have gone a little overboard.

With Doug Gilmour getting his turn in the spotlight tonight, I haven't done a similar tribute to my second favorite Leaf of all-time. I did toy with the idea of doing a Top 93 Dougie Moments list, but then I did the math and realized I would have had to have started in October. Also, my wife threatened to leave me.

But I just can't let the moment pass without putting something together. So while this list isn't meant to be definitive, here's my own personal Doug Gilmour top 10.

#10 - Don't fear the Reaper

This was one of Gilmour's first games as a Leaf. Late in the game, Bryan Marchment got a little too snippy with Wendel Clark, leading to Steve Smith's face exploding and, eventually, Stu Grimson going insane.

Watch at 4:00, as Gilmour executes an open field tackle, followed by what appears to be a german suplex.

Side note: I think this is the fourth time in less than a year that I've used this clip in a post. I may have a problem.

#9 - The Cow Legs

You know, I'm sure this seemed like a good idea at the time.

#8 - The Interview

Dougie always was great with the media.

#7 - The Elbow

Late in game one of the 1993 conference finals, Gilmour cut across the blue line and found himself on the receiving end of a Marty McSorley elbow. The hit dropped Gilmour to the ice for several moments, although luckily he wasn't seriously hurt on the play.

Why is this a Doug Gilmour highlight? Well, it's not, but it is an excuse to show this:

Good times.

#6 - The Head Butt

I'm a little hazy on the exact details, but at some point after their playoff run-in Gilmour crossed paths with McSorley again. They went nose-to-nose (OK, nose-to-chest), McSorley said something, and Gilmour head-butted him.

Now, it is technically true that there is an obscure and rarely enforced NHL rule against head-butting somebody in the face. But I defend Gilmour here, since a.) McSorley clearly deserved it, and b.) he was probably momentarily thrown off my the fact that half of McSorley's face was still missing, thanks to Wendel Clark.

I'm pretty sure Gilmour also head-butted Enrico Ciccone at one point. That one's a little harder top justify, but I think Dougie was just mad at him for using an obviously fake name stolen from a bad mafia movie.

#5 - For Your Consideration

Gilmour's 1992-93 season was the best any Leaf has had, ever, end of story. It resulted in Gilmour getting strong consideration for the MVP award (he ended up finishing second).

That lead to the Leafs producing this video that was sent to Hart voters, a perfect storm of highlights, a ridiculous interview, and 90s techno music.

#4 - His Hair in "The Passion Returns" Video

The problem with agreeing to appear in a video like this is that sometimes, you'll look back in hindsight and realize your hair was ridiculous and embarrassing and everyone will laugh at you for it. But enough about Damien Cox. Gilmour's hair was pretty bad too.

Skip ahead to 6:40. Dear lord.

Seriously, this video lead to about a thousand identical "Dougie Scissorhands" jokes in the first week after it was released.

And since we're analyzing hair, how is it that Wendel has a full head of hair in this video even though he was going bald during the playoff run. Did they film this in the pre-season just in case?

#3 - The Six Assist Game

Doug Gilmour has 95 assists during the 92-03 season, a fact I know without having to look it up even though I don't know when my parents' birthdays are. A half dozen of those came in one game against the Stars, tying a Leaf record.

Highlights from the game start at 1:40 of this clip:

#2 - Game Seven

The Game Seven upset over the Red Wings has become known as the Borschevsky game, and rightfully so. But the game was also one of Gilmour's finest moments as a Leaf.

Most fans remember Gilmour setting up the OT winner, but some have forgotten his clutch goal to tie the game in the final minutes. Gilmour took Wendel Clark's centering pass (thankfully stealing it off the stick of Bob Rouse) and buried it to send the game to overtime.

Side note: That tying goal was scored at 17:17, which I'm pretty sure can be taken as further confirmation that the hockey gods are Wendel fans.

#1 - The Goal

Only 48 hours after the Red Wings upset, the Leafs faced the Blues in game one of their second round series. The Leafs came out flying, and were clearly the better team. But they ran into a brick wall named Curtis Joseph, who turned in one of the all-time great games in playoff history.

While the Leafs peppered Joseph with shots (and also kicked him in the head once, probably accidentally), they couldn't beat him. With the game well into a second overtime and Joseph closing in on 60 saves, it looked like the Leafs would need some sort of divine intervention.

No problem.

Factoring in the situation and degree of difficulty, Gilmour's goal was the greatest I've ever seen. I can't find the CBC clip, but Bob Cole's call is a classic: "Solo job... and he's won it!" followed by Harry Neale's "The best player... wins the best game... in the best way".

Congratulations, Killer. It was a short run, but it was a great one. Enjoy your night.

Live-blogging Leafs vs. Avs

I will be live-blogging tonight's Leafs/Avs game over at thescore.com. Feel free to drop by whenever the PPP game thread freezes, and find out how many Raycroft saves and/or shots of tequila it will take before I snap and get myself fired.

TheScore.com live blog - Avs vs. Leafs

(Fair warning: if the game is dull, I plan to randomly start liveblogging games from the Leafs 1993 playoff run instead.)

Has fighting really been dropping since the 90s? The numbers.

In my last post, I made reference to my assumption that while fighting may have increased this season, it's still down significantly from 15 years ago. I linked to some data from hockeyfights.com that went back as far 2001, then said this:

While I can't find any stats on fighting frequency in 1993, I feel pretty safe in saying it was significantly higher than even this season's numbers. If anyone can point to the numbers and they prove me wrong, I'll be glad to eat some crow.

An anonymous commenter, who I'm just going to go ahead and assume is Howard Berger, called me on it:

It isn't good enough for me for you to basically suggest, "I think I'm right, but if you prove me wrong, by all means. Until then, this argument stands." It's the kind of technique you'd call Damien on and it undermines your argument, in my opinion.

After permanently IP-banning him, I got to thinking about his comment. I decided to dig a little deeper and ended up finding what I think are some reasonable ballpark numbers going back to 1991.

So, once again courtesy hockeyfights.com, here are some estimates. I took their yearly fight log for each season, and counted the number of fights listed. I call this an estimate, since I'm not sure how complete their records are (although my guess is they're pretty complete) and there may be some altercations included where both guys didn't get majors. Still, when it comes to fight data online hockeyfights.com is pretty much the undisputed champ, so I feel pretty good about these numbers.

(Update: the owner of hockeyfights.com confirmed that they're "very confident" that the data is complete, with the exception of the occasional tweak.)

Here's what the numbers show. All are for regular season only.

1990-91 - 772 fights
1991-92 - 792 fights
1992-93 - 642 fights
1993-94 - 835 fights
1994-95 - 506 fights (short-season due to lockout)
1995-96 - 785 fights
1996-97 - 907 fights
1997-98 - 838 fights
1998-99 - 660 fights
1999-00 - 573 fights
2000-01 - 684 fights
2001-02 - 803 fights
2002-03 - 668 fights
2003-04 - 789 fights
2004-05 - No season
2005-06 - 466 fights
2006-07 - 497 fights
2007-08 - 664 fights
2008-09 - 784 fights (projected)

In graph form (minus the lockout years):


So was my assumption about fighting dropping over the past 15+ years correct? Mostly, with a few caveats.

There's clearly been a downward trend since the early 90s. The drop doesn't actually seem to start in earnest until the late 90s, which is later than I had assumed. There's a big drop in 1998, a climb back up, and then fighting falls off a cliff after the lockout.

I made the point that even if fighting reaches its projected level for this season (which is unlikely since fighting usually declines late in the season), it would still fall far below the levels seen in the 90s. That turns out to be true, although perhaps not as significantly as I would have expected.

Beyond that, my reference to 1993 actually turned out to be wrong, at least as far as the 1992-93 season goes. That year saw fewer fights than even last season, which seems surprising. It was also an out lier, far below the average of other years in the early 90s.

Why? What happened in 1992-93? Answer: The instigator rule. The rule came into effect that year, and initially caused a significant reduction in fighting. Those who were fans back then will remember how haphazardly the rule was applied in that first season, with referees trying to call it on virtually every fight. Sometimes it seemed that if your gloves hit the ice a fraction of a second early, you got an extra two.

The rule helped keep fighting low that season, but the effect was temporary. After some tweaks to the rule and how it was called, fighting went back to previous levels.

One additional point to consider: While this list includes total fights league-wide, the NHL has been adding teams since the early 90s. There were only 21 teams in 1999-91, compared to 30 now. More teams means more games, so all else being equal we'd expect the numbers to be trending upwards.

So for example, this year's projected 784 fights would be an average of 0.64 fights per game. That would actually equal the 0.64 average of 1992-93 (when there were 24 teams, and the league played 84 games), and would be far below the per-game averages in other years from the early 90s despite the grand total being comparable.

The verdict: My general claim of fighting levels dropping over the past two decades was right. My specific claim about 1993 turns out to be wrong (it's even, but not higher) because I had the misfortune of picking a year that turned out to be an aberration due to the instigator.

I suppose that means that I do have to eat a little bit of crow. But I think the overall point stands. Fighting has been trending downwards for a long time, and the numbers back it up.

Why I'm not ashamed to like fighting

I tried. I really did.

I tried to stay out of the recent fighting debate, which predictably re-ignited after the Don Sanderson tragedy and seems to have its second wind after Friday's scary Garrett Klotz injury.

I think most of the back-and-forth over fighting is disingenuous, an example of media (and some bloggers) jumping on a controversial subject just to get some attention. And I've also come to learn that people generally visit this blog for OCD-level nostalgia and Kyle Wellwood fat jokes, not serious hockey talk. Which is fine.

But I have a problem. My side of the argument doesn't seem to be represented in the debate.

So here's my stance on fighting:

1. I find it entertaining.
   
2. I think the reduction in fighting during the Bettman era has contributed to a less interesting product.
   
3. I'm not ashamed of #1 and 2.
   

Apparently I'm not supposed to say that. No, if I want to support fighting, I'm supposed to frame the argument as a safety issue (players must police themselves, they need an outlet, there must be accountability for cheap shots, etc).

Well, all of that may be true, or it may not. I don't play in the NHL, so I don't think I'm really qualified to say.

But I am a fan of the NHL, and I think that fans should be able to talk about what they do or don't find entertaining about a sport. And I thought the NHL was a lot more fun to watch when there was more fighting.

Is it insensitive to talk about entertainment value when we're dealing with the possibility of players being injured or even killed? Probably. But the NHL is an entertainment product. The league will grow or fade based on whether people think its product is more or less entertaining than any of the many alternatives.

Any discussion of a major rules change that ignore the impact on the entertainment value of the games is a meaningless exercise. It's fine as a philosophical argument, but not a real world one.

And before the anti-fighting folks feign their well-rehearsed outrage that we're even talking about entertainment, let's not forget that it used to be them who were banging that drum. Remember when the NHL just had to reduce fighting to help grow the game in the US, especially in non-traditional markets? Now that that strategy has been shown to be a failure, we're supposed to pretend that it was never about ratings in the first place.

Well frankly, I'm getting a little tired of hearing reporters who haven't bought a ticket in 20 years dismiss the feelings of fans. I'm getting a little tired of the holier-than-thou lectures -- all delivered over endless highlight reels of fights, of course. Got to grab those viewers, after all.

I think Don Sanderson's death was a tragedy, but I don't think it changes anything about the fighting debate. We always knew that a player could die in a fight. We also knew that it was extraordinarily unlikely. Both are still true.

But apparently only those who want fighting banned get to mourn Sanderson. Here's how one blogger put the argument: "People who defend fighting in hockey need to stop acting like they think every incident is a huge tragedy. If you really thought that, you'd ban it."

Bull. I can mourn Sanderson and I can cringe when a player gets hurt, and I can still believe that fighting has a place in the game. Hockey is a dangerous sport. Players take risks every time they take a hit, block a shot, or go into a corner. We've seen some horrible injuries over the years thanks to headshots, slapshots and stray skate blades. Accepting that a high-speed contact sport will carry a certain level of risk doesn't make me a caveman.

Look, I like fighting and want it to stay in the NHL, but I can also recognize that there are good arguments against it. I find it painful to have to listen to a guy like Mike Milbury talk about fighting's opponents as pansies and granola-crunchers.

Maybe the players are just too big and strong these days. Maybe our better understanding of concussions should change the discussion. Maybe something needs to be done about meaningless fights that don't seem to have any point beyond padding PIM totals.

Personally, I think the NHL should enforce better rules about helmets and chin straps. I think that a rule against slewfoot take-downs during fights sounds like a good idea.

I think there are lots of folks who want to see the NHL go even further who have their hearts in the right place. I just don't agree.

And I'd appreciate a little respect from the other side. It should be possible to like fighting -- not just support it or tolerate it, but actually like it -- without being dismissed as a knuckle-dragging thug.

Or at least it should. So save your lectures, media stars. I'm a fan. My voice counts too.

How to fix All-Star Weekend

Let's face it, all-star weekend sucks.

The young stars game is a joke. The actual all-star game is a complete writeoff, since nobody plays defence, the "one player per team" rule dilutes the roster, and anyone with so much as a hangnail decides not to play.

The skills competition is probably the highlight of the weekend, but that's not saying much. While the NHL has tried to spice up the events over the years, there's still an element of "been there, done that" to the whole proceedings. Does anybody really want to see another puck relay?

The NHL needs to get creative. So in the spirit of innovation, here are a few suggestions for new events the league could add to better capture the current flavor of the game.

Who are you and
why are you yelling at me?

Mainstream Media Fake Outrage-a-thon - Media superstars such as Pierre McGuire, Nick Kypreos and Mike Milbury will be given a controversial subject to discuss and will earn points by screaming well-rehearsed sound bites at each other while a producer shouts into their earpiece to be more animated. Topics will include fighting, the CBA, head shots, fighting, goalie equipment and also fighting. As in the real world, the media members will only be told which side of the debate they're on shortly before they go on air.

Where's Dany? - After Dany Heatley is hypnotized into believing he's playing in an important playoff game, all 20,000 fans will be given binoculars and forensics kits to see if they can find any evidence of him being in the arena.

American Anthem Endurance Contest - Wannabe singers and American Idol rejects from around the United States will compete to see who can take the most time to sing the pre-game national anthem, completely sapping any energy from the players and crowd. Last singer standing wins. Fans are encouraged to participate by throwing coins and shoes.

Credibility-Destroying Fan Ballot Box Stuffing Contest - Oops, they did that one already.

Let's just save time and
leave the red light on

Vesa Toskala Accuracy Shooting - From the slot, NHL snipers try their best to take shots that actually make contact with Toskala's glove or blocker.

Revenue Share Scramble - Representatives from southern US markets have sixty seconds to crawl around on their hands and knees and grab for any loose change that falls out of the pockets of the Leafs, Habs and Rangers. Special bonus: During this event, Gary Bettman will stand in the background and proclaim that the game's economics are just great.

Neglected Toddler - During the downtime in between events, Sean Avery wanders around the ice begging someone, anyone, to pay attention to him.

Goal Judge Skills Competition - Video replay goal judges from around the league compete to see who can up with the most unique and creative way to screw the Buffalo Sabres.

"How Much Was It Worth?" - At the conclusion of the All-Star game, one lucky fan gets to spin the Gary Bettman Wheel of Randomness to determine how many points the game was actually worth.

Delay of Blame - A puck is flipped up into the stands from the defensive zone, and six players per side compete to see who can be the first to point, wave their arms and otherwise browbeat the referee who actually did know that rule already, thanks.

Looking to go five-hole

Sissy Fight! - Skill players compete in a series of events to see which player fights most like a girl. Events include the Alexander Semin Slap Party, the Mikhail Grabovski Linesman Tickle, and of course the Sidney Crosby Package Punch

Icing Murder - Players compete to inflict the most damage to a helpless defenceman on an otherwise meaningless icing play. Bonus points will be awared for broken bones, career-ending injuries, or fatalities. (Note: In order to make this event competitive, members of the Montreal Canadiens will not be allowed to compete.)

And finally...

The NHL Superstar Decision-Making Sprint - NHL stars such as Mats Sundin, Scott Niedermayer, Joe Sakic and Brendan Shanahan are given a list of basic decision-making tasks to complete. Events will include ordering a sandwich at a deli, accepting or declining a new Facebook friend, and choosing their next Netflix rental. (Note: This event is expected to conclude some time in early 2010.)

It's not too early

Image Courtesy lordosis via PPP

As part of my continuing attempts to deal with Stage Five...

Let's assume that the Islanders have wrapped up last place. If the Leafs can continue their climb fall plummet into 29th, what would that mean in terms of the draft lottery? In a draft that has plenty of talent but only two blue chip franchise prospects, what would it mean if the Leafs entered the lottery in the #2 spot?

Assuming that the lottery rules are the same as previous years (with the same distribution of odds, and the rule that no team can move up more than four spots), here's how the odds break down.

18.8% - Odds that the Leafs win the lottery and move up to #1
25.0% - Odds that the Islanders win the lottery, meaning the Leafs stay at #2
39.2% - Odds that a team behind the Leafs wins the lottery and bumps them down to #3
17.0% - Odds that a team behind the Leafs wins the lottery, but does not move up far enough to bump them out of the #2 spot.

In other words, if the Leafs can finish 29th they'll have an 60.8% chance at landing Tavares or Hedman.

Yes... we... can!

Maple Leaf salary fun facts

Here's a couple of loose ends from last week's Mid-Season Value Ranking post. While putting the post together, I did some research into the Leafs' current contract and salary cap commitments. I learned a couple of things that I found interesting.

Fun fact #1: The Leafs highest paid forward is Jason Blake, thanks to his Contract of Eternal Damnation™. Next on the list is recent FA signing Nik Hagman. Do you know which Leaf forward is their third highest paid?

No, not Antropov. No, not Poni. Not even Stempy. Give up? It's this guy.

Fun fact #2: Unlike many teams, the Leafs don't have much in the way of long-term contracts. In fact, as of today the team only has a cap commitment to one player beyond 2012. Can you name him? Answer: this guy.

Oh, and on a completely unrelated note, this.

Maple Leafs Mid-Season Value Ranking

As we stumble past the mid-season mark, this seems like as good a time as any to do a status report on the 2008-09 Maple Leafs. And with the trade deadline just seven weeks away, I'm going to take a slightly different approach.

I'm going to try to rank the Maple Leafs, top to bottom, based on their value. Not their production, not their potential, and not their likelihood of being dealt. I want the big picture. I want to figure out which Leafs are currently the most valuable NHL assets.

Obviously, there's no such thing as one league-wide price tag you could put on a player. The contending Sharks would have a different view of "value" on the Leafs roster than the rebuilding Islanders.

But imagine it this way: What if the NHL allowed teams to bid for a player's contract on the open market? Which Leafs would get the highest bid?

Sound like a fun time-waster? Then here are the rules:

1. We're looking at everything: track record, current production, injury status, intangibles, and especially contract. I've included cap hit and contract length for each player. Contract status is a huge consideration in a salary cap world.
   
2. To that end, I'll draw a line at the point where I think we reach negative value. Yes, a player can have negative value -- these are the guys who are overpaid to the extent that you literally could not give them away (at least without sweetening the deal, or taking back another negative value guy). Let's see how far we can get before we hit that line.
   
3. I've ranked players from the current NHL roster only (although I included both Stralman and Sifers since they switched spots today).
   
4. No ties. Everyone gets their own spot.
   

Here we go...

1. Luke Schenn ($2.225M through 2011) - An easy call here. Schenn is the only untouchable Leaf, and is their most valuable NHL asset by a mile.

2. Tomas Kaberle ($4.25M through 2011) - Not his best year, but still has tremendous talent. Given his age and track record, his contract is excellent.

3. Mikhail Grabovski ($850K through 2009) - He's young, and has already shown signs of explosive offensive potential. He's also inconsistent, has questionable character, and needs a new contract. And he's older than you think (he turns 25 in two weeks).

4. Matt Stajan ($1.75M through 2010) - Is having a career year offensively on the top line. He's a little on the soft side and isn't really an especially well-rounded player, but is capable defensively. He's also signed through next year at a very reasonable rate.

5. Nik Antropov ($2.05M through 2009) - Might be the toughest Leaf to rank, given his upcoming UFA status. Still, he's put up solid numbers two years running and seems healthy again. Would probably jump up several spots if he signed a reasonable extension.

6. Nikolai Kulemin ($1.487M through 2010) - On the one hand, he's struggled most of this year. On the other, he's shown flashes here and there. Not a blue-chip stud by any means, but I'm not sure how I could rank him much lower.

7. Alexei Ponikarovsky ($2.105M through 2010) - Certainly isn't flashy, but he keeps finding ways to score. At his current level of production, he's a bargain through next season.

8. Niklas Hagman ($3.0M through 2012) - Offensive production has cooled off recently. Still, given everything he brings to the table his contract seems like a bargain right now.

9. Pavel Kubina ($5M through 2010) - Great example of a guy who's be attractive to a contender, but has little value on a rebuilding team. Has been inconsistent through his entire stint as a Leaf, with the exception of a short stretch at the end of last year. Is overpaid, but given everything he can do his contract isn't terrible and it only runs through one more year.

10. Jonas Frogren ($1.065 through 2010) - Was a virtual unknown coming into the year, but has shown the kind of mean streak most coaches love from a second or third-line defenceman. Is too old (29) to have much upside, but should improve somewhat as he gets used to the North American game.

11. Dominic Moore ($900K through 2009) - Has cooled off significantly over the past month, but still brings a nice mix of speed and occasional offense. Short, cheap contract could make him very attractive to a contender.

12. Ian White ($850K through 2010) - Is versatile and has contributed occasional offense while leading the team in +/-. Is only 24 and is signed very cheaply through next year.

13. Vesa Toskala ($4M through 2010) - Would have been in the top three if I'd done this in the pre-season, but his value has been dropping steadily all year. Could he be significantly better on another team? Every other Leaf goalie seems to be.

14. John Mitchell ($487K through 2010) - Still has another year left on a rock-bottom deal, which means he represents solid value even if he never makes it past the third and fourth lines.

15. Lee Stempniak ($2.5M through 2010) - Is making second-line money, but often goes several games without doing anything noticable. Is probably young enough to still have some upside.

16. Mike Van Ryn ($2.9M through 2010) - Was a pleasant surprise in the early going, but ongoing concussion problems have to be factored into his value.

17. Jaime Sifers ($505K through 2009) - Has looked like a borderline NHLer in limited playing time. His two best features are that he's young, and he's cheap.

18. Jamal Mayers ($1.33M through 2010) - He's a good dressing room guy and can kill penalties. He's also moderately overpaid for what he brings to the table.

--------------- negative value ---------------

19. Jeff Finger ($3.5M through 2012) - Has been almost exactly as advertised: solid, unspectacular, and overpaid. Could become attractive to a contender in another year when his contract is nearing the halfway point.

20. Jeremy Williams ($487K through 2009) - Puts up reasonably numbers given his limited opportunity, but nobody in the Leafs organization seems to feel he has much future.

21. Anton Stralman ($732K through 2010) - I know he's a favorite of some of you, but at this point he hasn't shown that he's going to be an NHL defenceman. He could still make that leap, but right now every team has one or two guys that are exactly like him, and many of them are cheaper.

22. Brad May ($600K through 2009) - Virtually all his value comes from his dressing room impact. Works cheap, but Leafs are probably the only team in the league that can squeeze any value out of him right now.

23. Andre Deveaux ($480K through 2009) - He's cheap, young, and tough. And so far, he hasn't shown any indication that he has much of an NHL future.

24. Ryan Hollweg ($512K through 2009) - All but useless as a player. His expiring contract is really his only virtue.

25. Curtis Joseph ($700K through 2009) - Not really playing near an NHL level these days. At least the contract is short.

26. Jason Blake ($4.0M through 2012) - His play has picked up modestly lately, but he's still a borderline third-liner on any decent team. Given his age and production curve, his contract has to be among the worst in the league.

So there's your list. From Schenn to Blake, all 26 current Leafs ranked in order of value. Eighteen guys with at least some value, and eight that would probably clear waivers today.

I'll be amazed if anyone thinks I got this exactly right, so let me hear it. Who needs to move up? Who needs to drop down? Who am I completely out to lunch on?

1967 vs 1961

Just a quick note that I'll be appearing on tonight's episode of the Hockeenight "Puckcast" podcast, via the fine folks at the Chicago Blackhawks blog hockeenight.com.

We'll be talking about old Norris battles, the current outlook of the Leafs, and presumably sharing Stanley Cup stories that our great-grandparents told us.

Assuming we get throuh the entire hour without them hanging up on me because I steer every conversation back to Wendel Clark killing Mike Peluso, the podcast should be posted some time late tonight or tomorrow morning. Head over and check it out.

Update: You can now listen to the podcast using the link below. Topics discussed included the Norris division glory days, the instigator rule, hockey moustaches, Stu Grimson's madness and whether Bryan Marchment was the worst human being of all-time.

And just for old time's sake:

How I Stopped Worrying and Learned to Love the Loss

There are five discrete stages through which people deal with tragedy. To fans of this year's Maple Leafs, the stages will be familiar:

1. Denial: You know, if a few of the kids player well, and Wilson gets them playing defence, and Toskala stands on his head, and the Rangers and Penguins team planes collide in mid-air at some point... this team could make a run at a playoff spot.
   
   
2. Anger: ARGH, DAMN YOU MATS THIS IS SOMEHOW ALL YOUR FAULT!
   
   
3. Bargaining: Can we at least beat the Senators and Habs? No? OK, can we beat the Senators and beat up the Habs?
   
   
4. Depression: Toskala sucks, the young guys aren't developing, we get pushed around every night, we have no draft picks, Jason Blake just did a fist pump even though we're behind by five goals, and I'm debating whether the pipes in my basement ceiling will hold my weight.

Which brings us to stage five:

5. Acceptance

Today, for the first time, I'm admitting to myself that I've reached stage five.

I accept that this season is a writeoff. I accept that the Leafs are a bad team. I accept that there's no point getting attached to anyone because at least three-quarters of these players will be gone in two years. I accept that there is no miracle coming. I accept that it's going to take years to fix all of this. I accept that now, it's all about the draft pick.

I accept that from now on, losses are good and wins are bad.

Gah.

If I'm being honest, I've been at stage five for weeks, maybe months. Maybe even since the beginning. But I've lied to myself.

The signs were there. All year long, I've never been especially bothered by a loss. When the Leafs won, great. When they lost, oh well. I've lived my Leaf fan life in a sort of strange purgatory, going through the motions but feeling numb about it all. In hindsight, I'm surprised I didn't paint my finger nails black and start writing poetry in my algebra notebook.

You have to understand, I used to be the guy you had to avoid at work the day after a Leafs loss because he might fly off the handle and start knocking coffee mugs off of random desks. And that was in the pre-season.

Not this year. In fact, oddly enough the only games that have bothered me this year have been the OT losses. We lost the game, and we moved up in the standings? Screw you, Gary.

So it's time to stop living a lie. It's time to come clean. It's time to live in the real world. It's time to start losing.

Well, OK, it's time to continue losing. But you get the point.

Just to be clear, I will not root against the Leafs. I can't do it. I can not sit down to watch a game and cheer for the other side. I can't high-five over another team's goal. I just can't. Being a Leaf fan is in my DNA. The instincts are too strong.

But I'm also not going to pretend to be mad about losing, or excited about a win. The lie is over. I can see the big picture. We need to finish last, or as close to it as possible.

I want...

... hold on, I can do this...

I want the Leafs to lose. A lot. As often as possible. As in, every night.

I feel so dirty. Hold me.

Grabovski suspension is deserved

News comes this afternoon that the league has suspended Mikhail Grabovski for three games for abuse of officials after his little temper tantrum last night.

And you know what? They got this one right.

I'm as thrilled as any Leafs fan to see the normally timid Grabovski get a little bit fired up for a change. I think he'd be fun to watch if he played with a bit of an edge, and I hope he keeps it up. But there is a line, and he went over it last night. You can't get physical with an official. Period.

Is it right that Grabovski gets three games for a little shove on a linesman, while Tom Kostopoulos gets the same for nearly ending Mike Van Ryn's career? Of course not, but it's an apples and oranges comparison. The rules are different for fellow players than they are for officials. And it goes without saying that they should be.

The league has specific rules in place for dealing with abuse of officials. Minor incidents are three games, major ones are ten or more. Once the league decides that abuse has taken place, there's very little room for judgement calls. Grabovski's case was clearly a minor offence, so the three games was automatic. And that's fair.

And while we're at it, let's bring it down a notch on the praise for Grabovski's tantrum. Yes, it's nice that -- for once -- a Maple Leaf seemed cranky about being on the receiving end of yet another lopsided loss. But Grabovski wasn't looking to fight. He knew where the linesmen were, he knew the situation was under control, and he was putting on an act. Let's not pretend our little guys are suddenly enforcers because they can pretend to want to fight and then wave to a crowd. That's what Sens fans are for.

So settle down, Leaf Nation. It may not have been much, but it was something and Grabovski deserves a short vacation for it.

Leafs/Habs post-game thoughts

• I think I'm enjoying the Brad May era. You?
  
  
• You know those cartoons you see around New Year's, where the weak and hobbled old man representing the forgotten past gives way to the energetic baby who represents the possibilities of the future? Didn't this week kind of feel like that, with the Battle of Ontario playing the old man and the renewed Leafs/Habs rivalry playing the little baby?
  
  
• Kudos to Mayers for taking care of business, and to May for reinforcing the point. He even seemed to have fired up Grabovski, who managed a draw in his fight. Yes, it was against a linesman, but we're taking baby-steps here.
  
  
• And let's be honest, Grabovski-Kostitsyn would have made Semin-Staal look like Clark-McSorley
  
  
• In all seriousness, anyone questioning the May deal is missing the point. It's not about helping the team win games. It's not even about winning fights. It's about the fact that this team had a terrible dressing room for three years, where losing was fine and excuses ruled. Fletcher rolled a grenade into the room, and it got better -- for a while. Based on Wilson's comments after the Florida game, they're heading back to their old ways.
  
  You can not develop young players in an environment where losing is acceptable. If May can remind the younger guys how to work hard and compete, he's worth a sixth-round pick and more.
  
  And if all of that sounds like an indictment of the current veteran core of the team, well, it probably is.
  
  
• By the way, where is it written that May can't come in, play regular minutes for eight weeks, remind the young guys what a professional looks like... and then be dealt at the deadline? And if he looks anything like he did against the Habs over the new two months, don't you think the Leafs can get more than a sixth for him from a contender?
  
  
• Seriously, what did Grabovski do that has the entire Habs team hating him so much? Is he just that much of an obnoxious prick off the ice (and face it, he kind of has that vibe), or is there a bigger story here? Did he Leeman somebody's wife? Was he one of those guys who can't have a normal conversation without quoting a Simpsons episode? Did he just walk around holding a knife and pineapple at all times and creep everybody out? What?
  
  
• We only got the French broadcast here in Ottawa, so I was a little confused when I saw Felix and Wendel being honored before the game. For a second, I thought the league had finally got around to reversing the Fraser/Gretzky non-call and the Leafs were being awarded the 1993 Stanley Cup retroactively.
  
  
• Hey, do you think the Habs front office invited Dave Keon to the ceremony, just to twist the knife into MLSE? And couldn't you imagine him thinking about going?
  
  
• Unrelated note: word is just in that the Sens had to take cabs to the airport after tonight's loss to the Bruins, since their team bus has Daniel Alfredsson and Jason Spezza stuck under it.
  
  
• Finally, let's play a round of "write Damien Cox's Friday column for him":
  
  "Knuckle-dragging Leafs fans begging for fisticuffs got their wish on Thursday as the Brad May era kicked off with two fights, surely pleasing Brian Burke. But the thuggish Leafs were blown out by the speedy and talented conference-leading Habs. There's absolutely no logical connection between those two statements, but I will still attempt to passive-aggressively imply one!"
  
  Am I close?
  

Leafs/Habs - Guest preview

In anticipation of tonight's renewal of the Leafs/Habs rivalry, I received an invite to participate in in a Q+A session with fellow Score Network bloggers Lions in Winter. Both sides would send a half-dozen questions of their choosing, and post the answers they received.

You can see his answers below. My answers answers to his questions can be found here.

Is the Leafs/Habs rivalry still meaningful to you? How does it compare to, say, the Bruins these days?

I didn't grow up in the 60s, so aside from a few years when my University friends were enjoying playoff hockey and I wasn't, I've always hated the Bruins more. I'm finding it hard to hate anyone as much as smirky Lucic and his smug- (and at the same time blank-) looked coach Claude Julien. Adding Brian Burke should help stoke the fires...

What are Habs fans doing to keep busy these days, now that they've finished shoveling the last few clumps of dirt on whatever credibility the all-star game had left? Will you feel a special sense of pride when the NHL is forced to scrap fan voting next year?

You give too much credit to the Habs fans here. The credibility is as long gone as Leafs first round picks under Pat Quinn. The thing that upsets me is that the management saw it fit to make the game the centerpiece of our "100th" season. It was as shrewd a choice as choosing Tremblay over Roy in '95. It is akin to taking your wife to Tijuana for your 25th anniversary. It was tacky and wrong.

That said, I am glad the league might rethink the voting where people can vote for a bloc of players. Maybe they'll also give some thought to nominating duds in the first place...

While you were obviously happy to roll over the Kings in 1993, isn't there at least a small part of you that feels ripped off that you didn't get to play the Leafs that year? What would a Leafs/Habs Cup final have been like? Would the entire country have shut down for two weeks?

If I'm honest, the Leafs didn't become an object of obsession or rivalry until they were put into the East. Once Pittsburgh was eliminated by the weak weak Islanders, we were all thinking Cup no matter who here. It could have been Toronto, I suppose. had it been Toronto, I think I would have learned a thing or two about hockey history and this country. As it was, I had to wait for that lesson.

Knowing what I know now, I think it would have been mayhem, especially in Montreal and Toronto. There probably would have had to be some shutdowns had there been a game 6 or 7. Kinda like a European town during a WC elimination match. The fallout for you guys watching us parade the cup would have been worse than any high-sticking affair...

It's been widely reported that Mats Sundin would have been dealt to the Canadiens if he had agreed to waive his no-trade clause. The Habs went on to finish as the top seed, then lose to a #6 seed underdog in the second round. Could Sundin have made a difference? Does it bother you that a deal couldn't get done?

Had we traded for Sundin and still traded Huet, it would have been clear a two-headed monster was in charge. It nearly happened that way too. Carey Price was shaky long before the playoffs and for most of the season before his call-up from the AHL in late January. Huet was no saviour, but wouldn't let in every high wrist shot on offer. Sundin would have watched those goals go in all night like the rest of the Habs, and then he'd have left in the summer. With a contingency plan in goal like Huet, Sundin could have made a difference. He couldn't have scored less than Plekanec say in that series.

I am bothered though that a deal couldn't get done, because Gainey seems to be full of rumored deals and ends up coming up with the Robert Langs in the end - lots of consolation prizes. Some of us feel he needs to take a few risks. Trade a few of the "prospects" before they either leave or turn into "once-prospects". If this playoff team is to become a contender, the feeling is Gainey will have to go beyond his comfort zone at some point.

This season, the Canadiens are celebrating their centennial by retiring numbers, hosting the all-star game, hosting the draft, and holding about a lengthy ceremony before every second game. Do you have anything planned for next season, when the team's 100 anniversary will actually occur?

It may come as a surprise to you guys in TO, because this may be the first season the CBC has shown the Habs in three decades, but Montreal has a lengthy ceremony before most games, centennial, 92 years, whatever. And the sweater retirements have been going on for three seasons straight now too. The special events are the all-star game (see above) and the draft (yippee).

Yet for all their failings, they have still done a lot of good things - reconciled with Roy, put some statues up (Morenz finally), etc. The best for me has been their history website, which if you've ever tried to write much about hockey history, is a true pleasure to look at and navigate.

As for next year, they haven't announced. A lot of people want an outdoor game (vs. Leafs at Big O?) probably on the anniversary. Who knows what else.

Mikhail Grabovski has had decent numbers for the Leafs this year, and occasionally shows some incredible moves out there. Is he the real deal? The Habs couldn't find a spot for him, what do they know that Leaf fans don't (yet)?

Grabovski is a good player, and like Ribeiro he'll put up decent numbers over his career. Also like Ribeiro, he had bad habits like fighting with teammates, showing total disregard for them and the feeling is he would be about as successful in the playoffs. But you see we (that's you guys and us over here), we don't like the same players. Grabovski might be right up your alley so long as he keeps it up with the talent.

Thanks again to Lions in Winter for participating. Be sure to bookmark them for all your Habs-taunting needs.

May-Day! May-Day!

New Leaf Brad May, seen here punching a man who
for some reason is naked from the waist down

The Leafs have acquired Brad May, in an attempt to partially fill their glaring toughness void.

Not much to get excited about here, although he did come cheap, costing only a conditional sixth-round pick in 2010. Acquiring a veteran scrapper also clears the way to deal Jamal Mayers at the deadline for a mid-rounder (or did you think he's suddenly killing penalties on merit?)

And, of course, we all look forward to Damien Cox's predictable "OMG, Leafs once again trading draft picks for veterans" column tomorrow.

The Prattle of Ontario

Some observations from a Battle of Ontario debacle that may have finally shovelled dirt on this rivalry once and for all, not to mention broken my spirit as a hockey fan.

• The Senators are terrible. I mean, the Leafs are terrible, and they still had a relatively easy time with Ottawa last night. Toronto is bad in a "well, maybe kind of sort of getting better" way. Ottawa is bad in an "abandon all hope ye who enter here" kind of way. Luckily, they have Buffalo next and you can always count on the Sabres to roll over and die in any post-Pominville game against a struggling Sens team.
  
  
• Hey, you know what else is terrible? Leafs/Sens games. I'm seeing lots of stories in the papers and online today describing the game as "gritty". Really? That was gritty? A half dozen guys on each team all trying to play the agitator role, trying to get bumped into and then flopping to the ice and looking for a referee? We call that gritty now? Tie Domi is rolling over in his grave.
  
  
• Word is Sidney Crosby wanted to play in last night's game but couldn't find anyone with two balls to punch.
  
  
• Speaking of which... so Chris Neil thinks that even though the Sens dumped Brian McGrattan and signed Jarkko Ruutu, he should still try to be a "pest" who runs from Kimbo Hollweg but goes after Ian White? Really? He's thinks that's his ticket to sticking around in the NHL? OK, just checking.
  
  
• It's official: Mike Fisher has entered the "golden boy" zone where announcers will refer to him as one of the best players on the ice no matter how awful he is. Yes, he threw some hits. He was also pointless, a minus, and lead both teams in giveaways. Also, he makes $4.2M/year. Through 2013. But he's scored three goals this season, so obviously none of this can be his fault.
  
  
• Yes, Jason Spezza deserved a spearing major based on the rulebook, but he barely touched Dominic Moore and Moore's hunched-over attempt to sell an injury was embarassing. Remember when Toronto didn't do that stuff? At least against Ottawa?
  
  
• And while I don't expect or want Tomas Kaberle to drop his gloves or even give Spezza so much as a girlish shove, wouldn't it be nice if his instinctive first reaction to seeing a teammate get speared wasn't to throw his arms in the air and look for a referee to whine to? Kaberle is the best player on the team, but sometimes he reminds you that he's the holdover from the old "leadership" core.
  
  
• I'll admit, I get way too excited whenever a Leaf goalie tries to score a goal. Unfortunately, Toskala's effort ended up fluttering harmlessly into the air and was easily gloved aside by a defenceman. You know what that means: he could play on the third line of either of these teams!