Olympic Second Glance

Flawed Approach?

On the heels of learning that the Canadian Olympic Committee admitting that Canada won't win the medal race, I'll admit my last blog was a bit rough on our dear Olympic Committee and athletes. Since I wrote it, a lot has happened. Team Canada hockey lost a game they were at the very least favoured to win, highly touted medal favourite Charles Hamelin (apparently pronounced Chal Amlah, according to TSN's awful Rod Black) managed to come up empty again, Mellisa Hollingsworth took a disappointing fifth place in the skeleton…as did Canada's best two-man bobsled team. Did I mention that Hamelin and his brother François managed to finish fourth and fifth in a five-man final after leading most of the race together?

However, that's not where I'm taking this blog…what I want to point out is the one Canadian Olympian that stands out more than any other who embodies how the C.O.C. should be building their team. His name is Jon Montgomery and he just so happens to have won gold in skeleton. Why Jon Montgomery? Because he's cocky without being arrogant, he takes his races seriously but off the track, he's intense but soft spoken, and he's obviously having fun and not succumbing to the pressure. The only other Canadian athletes to show this kind of fire are the mogul skiers. Canada's Olympic brass needs to focus on creating this type of attitude rather than the defeatist attitude that currently resides. Sure, Own the Podium is a nice idea…as long as you can back it up. But with favoured athletes choking badly time and again, it's obvious that our country's approach is sadly lacking in comparison to the Americans, Germans, Chinese, Koreans and even the Swiss.

In a country with ample ski mountains in the east and west, two Olympic speed skating ovals, two bobsled/luge/skeleton tracks, and countless cross-country skiing trails, along with likely the most indoor skating and hockey facilities in the world, there is no reason for Canada to struggle. We always bitch about funding for amateur sports but just adding money isn't going to change the fact that our athletes genuinely don't seem prepared for the pressure. The entire ski team – at least the men since the women's team is ravaged by injuries – is a colossal disappointment. They were given every opportunity to place well at Whistler and so far haven't. They trained on the run while skiers from other countries weren't allowed and yet, the highest any of the skiers can muster is a fifth place.

But it goes farther than our skiers. Our Canadian politeness is great as a day-to-day quality, but in the sports arena, there needs to be that killer instinct. However, to have that win-at-all costs mentality, our athletes need to learn that it's okay to be cocky like Montgomery. It's okay to have fun in the short time that you're an elite Olympic athlete and to be a character. Maybe, just maybe if our athletes were more entertaining off the field, more Canadians would pay attention to their sports more often than for two and a half weeks every four years. The Montgomery approach just might add the intensity that is sorely missing from our program. It's just too polite to accept constantly finishing just off the podium…let alone Canada not qualifying for more than a few finals in their own back yard.

After all, nobody remembers who finished outside the top three…or as my friend Shaun Deering calls fourth, fifth and sixth place, winning the Canadian Gold, Silver and Bronze.

Hockey Powerhouse Set for Demolition?

Like most Canadians, I'm rooting for the home team to flex their muscle and win the Olympic tournament. However, after watching them struggle mightily to score against the Swiss and the Americans I'm not of the belief that they simply ran into a couple of hot goaltenders. Sure, Jonas Hiller and Ryan Miller both made some incredible saves in frustrating the Canadian squad, but that's not the main reason the Canadians are snake-bitten so far.

There are a couple of elephants in the room that need to be addressed. We all know that Dany Heatley, Patrick Marleau and Joe Thornton play together in San Jose. Unfortunately, we also should know by now that the Shark Line members are quite accomplished at disappearing when the pressure goes up and the game gets bigger. For that reason, they might as well be called the Tin Man Line. The issue with this line is a simple one…they play a strictly finesse game and none of them really excel when the checking gets tighter. Not to mention Marleau is the smallest of the three at 6'2" and 220 pounds, not one of them readily initiates much in the way of contact or throws a body check. Big perimeter players simply aren't built for big game hockey.

And yet, the coaches not only refuse to try splitting them up, they keep trotting them out there for the first unit of every power play and in the last minute of a game when a goal is needed. Not surprisingly, Canada's power play is woeful to this point. And it's not just the Tin Man line. The second unit comes out with the ice cold duo of Corey Perry and Ryan Getzlaf along with the team's best forward to date, Sidney Crosby. The problem is, Crosby and Getzlaf are both playmakers and clearly aren't clicking. Of course, the best power play unit was the one we haven't seen since the Norway game with Rick Nash in front of the net, Crosby on the half wall and Jarome Iginla in the slot looking for a one timer.

Outside of that, Canada's roster of large gentlemen doesn't seem to remember how to drive the puck to the net and force the other team's defence. Instead, as a team, they choose to try fancy shinny plays and outside shots to the goalie's crest with no traffic in front. That's a sure-fire way to muster a paltry three goals on 45 shots. The solution is simple: use size and strength to dictate the play and force the other teams to take penalties. They certainly have the horses up front to play that way.

As for the other major concern: goaltending and defence. Everywhere you turn, people are screaming for Martin Brodeur's ouster and Roberto Luongo to come and save the day. Brodeur looked mediocre against the US; there is no doubt about that. However, he was also forced to face a lot of prime scoring chances despite the low shot count because three veteran defensemen were consistently exposed. Scott Niedermayer – who hasn't been anywhere near an elite player since he waffled on retirement in 2007, Chris Pronger and Dan Boyle were quite possibly the worst players on the ice against the Americans. However, that doesn't absolve Brodeur of blame. He played the puck surprisingly poorly and looked shaky on two of the four goals that went past him. As a result, Canada gets to play a qualifying match against Germany instead of a comfy bye into the quarterfinals.

Roberto Luongo will get the start against the Germans. For all those branding him the saviour, his shutout of Norway was as expected as the sun coming up in the east. He's a very skilled goaltender who is often mentioned in the conversation as one of, if not the best goaltenders in the world. However, the facts don't necessarily back up this praise. Luongo's been around for almost ten NHL seasons and to date has one Vezina nomination as best goaltender, won three international gold medals but only one as the starter (at the 2004 World Championships while the NHL playoffs were going on). He's also shown a bit of a streak of being unable to perform when needed most. He allowed seven goals in game six against Chicago in the second round of last the 2009 playoffs and the final game of the 2006 regular season…which would have earned the Canucks the final playoff spot (which the Oilers took on a Cinderella run to the Stanley Cup Finals).

It's now on his shoulders to backstop Canada, first past the Germans then against the Russians. I just hope, for Canada's sake, he's the Luongo of lore rather than the big game liability. Until he proves he isn't, count me as a sceptic.

Olympics at a Glance – Week One

Owning the Podium?

I've been watching an unhealthy amount of sports in the last week due to the Olympics and a few things stand out to me. First off, it's amazing how after a few short minutes of watching a less popular sport, we become experts. Watching moguls, I was screaming at my TV about how each run went and that was only day one. I now know what a double cork and double McTwist are, I'm adept at catching the difference between a clean triple lutz and one that wasn't just a little off and I'm fully aware that you need quiet arms in the ski jump because that's what the judges are looking for after all.

But there are other things at the Olympics that caught my eye, major issues that the Canadian team needs to address. First off, CTV's consortium of announcers need to learn that being critical of favoured Canadian athletes is allowed. If you're going to bill them as saviours, you have to hang the goat horns on them when they fail too. For example, in both long and short track speed skating, the Canadians would be hyped as having great shots at medals but as soon as they falter, our announcers make excuses like "this isn't her best event" or "he's using this as a warm up for the 1,500!"

Another issue is the feature on the high stakes of events like ski jumping, aerials, snowboard cross, downhill skiing, the half pipe and even figure skating. The part of the story that really irked me was when a sports psychologist for the Canadian athletes said she would never tell an athlete to take a major risk in competition if they have any doubt. Here's the issue about this. Canada's slogan at these games is "Own the Podium," which means they need to be taking risks to win. That's why the Americans take medals away in massive numbers, aside from their greater finances. The American athletes – with all that swagger and arrogance we as Canadians and the rest of the world despise – come to the highest pinnacle in sport with one goal in mind: win at all costs.

The reality is most these athletes get at most three sets of Olympic Games to shine and to not lay it all on the line is like asking for a participation ribbon. Canada isn't a great summer Olympics nation but with our abundance of winter and facilities to practice, there is no excuse for being happy with placing in the top ten when only the top three are remembered.

Concern on Ice

Well, it's already time for me to overanalyze the Canadian Olympic hockey team. After a nice little blowout of the lightweight Norway team, Canada – in the easiest draw in the tournament, laid a massive stinker in the second game against the Swiss. Yes, the Swiss. The team that thoroughly embarrassed Canada 2-0 in the 2006 Turin Games.

From the start of the very start of the tournament, I've had a few concerns with the Canadian team. Actually, I've had concerns with the team since it was named, but now that they have a couple games under their belt, my concerns are mounting. First off, the team's makeup. I'm all for chemistry on a hockey team. It's vital to any team's success and I understand that's why the coaches are playing regular teammates together on this team. However, the issue I have is very simple. Those guys should already have the chemistry needed to play well together in a tournament of the elite. It's the players from other NHL teams playing together that need to build chemistry in order to succeed when the games count. Which brings me to the fact that the Patrick- Marleau-Joe Thornton-Dany Heatley line and Ryan Getzlaf-Corey Perry line are playing too much so far? You could debate that the Sharks line (also known for their respective ghost impersonations in big games) are the best Canadian line so far. You could argue Getzlaf and Perry are playing well with Eric Staal and were just snake bitten against the Swiss. Doesn't matter, those guys are supposed to play well together.

However, people and the media want to dump on Sidney Crosby and the other seven players up front for not creating enough. Which gets my dander up in a big way? You see, Mike Babcock and Co. should be using the early rounds to put these guys out there a lot to see who works best with whom. And to build the chemistry between a Sidney Crosby and a Rick Nash or a Jerome Iginla. They should be getting Mike Richards and Jonathan Toews on the ice along with Brendan Morrow and even Patrice Bergeron. The only way those players are going to gel is by playing more than token minutes in a revolving door system on the bottom two lines.

Most importantly, Sidney Crosby is easily the best player on this team. He's their leading goal scorer and point getter coming into the tournament. He's a pressure player capable of carrying a team on his back and has the leadership chops at 22 that neither Joe Thornton nor Patrick Marleau have ever shown as they approach 30. Not using Crosby on the first unit power play is criminal and having him on the ice for what anything less than top three player minutes is bordering on irresponsible.

The other issue I have is burying a guy like Jerome Iginla, rather than using his experience as the only Team Canada forward with an Olympic gold medal. He also has the grit that is necessary when the going gets tough to score when it matters. I'm not saying that the Sharks and Ducks' players aren't carrying their weight; but we know they play well together, so Canada should have used the first two games to find out what they had with the players with less familiarity.

On the back end, I've never liked two of the picks: Dan Boyle and Scott Niedermayer. In addition to essentially bringing the same skill set, both are showing they are prone to giving the puck away, with Niedermayer being a sad shell of his former dominant self. His best tool – his speed – is failing him at this point in his career. His regular season is nothing short of abysmal as a big time minus player and yet he's playing top four minutes when his contribution is that of a sixth or seventh defenseman…

As for Boyle, he's what Steve Ludzik would call a Riverboat Gambler. He's about the same size as Niedermayer and has the same best attribute: speed. However, he doesn't think the game particularly well and is nothing short of mediocre defensively. Take into account that he's a plus four on a powerhouse Sharks team and you can see that he bleeds goals. It's a good thing Martin Brodeur is there to save his bacon.

That said the defence needs to play more of its young horses – both at even strength and on the power play. Coming into the Olympics, Duncan Keith is easily their best player back there and Drew Doughty is the likely number two. What they may lack in experience, they make up for in smarts and skill. Yet Keith is not getting any power play time despite being the highest scoring Team Canada defenseman coming in and Doughty got the bench for a giveaway while the veterans like Niedermayer and Boyle who commit garish turnovers are consistently sent over the boards.

Basically, Canada needs to be better from top to bottom to really put their stamp on this tournament. Efforts like the game against the Swiss are inexcusable and that's on the coaches every bit as much as it is on the players.

Non-Olympic Sports Talk

To borrow a nice little trick from Elliotte Friedman, one of the very best hockey journalists in the country, I'd like to switch gears to the Tiger Woods saga. This morning he finally faced the music with a 13 and a half minute statement about his affairs. First off, he went way farther than anyone predicted and hit on issues most thought he'd gloss over or make excuses for. Sure, he was rigid and it was obviously a carefully crafted statement, but he deserves a lot of credit for not taking the easy road like the vast majority of celebrity apologies.

We need to take a couple things into account with his press conference. Woods' words were sincere even if his delivery of them was awkward. I compare it to most school speeches and presentations you've ever delivered or witnessed. The speaker knows their stuff, but between nerves, pressure and even fear, it comes off as stiff and robotic. And that's for an audience of 30 without a video camera.

Woods' was under enormous pressure to come clean about the err of his ways and his audience was millions of people. The subject matter is also deeply personal and much more difficult than anything we presented in school, not to mention he has a hell of a lot more at stakes than getting a C-. As for being robotic…that's what Woods is. He was raised as a machine – as a golfer and as a person. It's what makes him so good at what he does, but it's also a big part of his demise.

The pressure of being a young phenom and billed by his own father as "being more important than Gandhi" at a young age is ridiculous. Woods was never allowed to have a normal life and like any sheltered kid from acting out at some point. Unfortunately, for Woods, he acted out as a married man and he got burned by it. He also got what he deserves for getting caught in his own mess.

But to go back to his statement today, I think Tiger Woods did what he had to do, even if he was about three months late to the party. He took responsibility and blame, he didn't make excuses and he explained how he's going to continue his rehabilitation. He's no longer seen as a perfect citizen and role model as he was before, which is a good thing; if we're going to look up to people, we should look up to those that can admit mistakes, take responsibility and show their warts rather than a carefully manufactured image.

Here Comes the Headshots Debate

Written by Wayne Coristine

Saturday was a busy night for hockey. And yet, one play really stands out and will for quite some time as evidence in the debate of the headshots epidemic some argue is taking over the NHL. In a game between the Florida Panthers and Flyers in Philadelphia, Panthers sniper David Booth crossed the blue line, dished the puck to a line mate and was caught looking the wrong way when Philly captain Mike Richards nailed him with an open ice check. Watch this clip of the hit to form your opinion of it before I explain mine.

A few things come to mind when you watch this play…starting with "holy shit!" then wondering if Richards: a) left his feet, b) used his elbow, c) was it a deliberate hit to the head d) was it late, and e) is Booth going to live?

I watched the hit several times, and it's obvious Richards had his back foot in the air when he hit Booth, but his front foot is firmly planted. Only after the hit do both Richards' feet leave the ice…because that's part of falling down after a big check. As for the elbow, not only does it not come up, but Richards actually leads the hit with the back
of his shoulder, so the elbow is never an issue.

Figuring out if it is a deliberate shot to the head is the hardest part of the dissection. Richards does what almost all big hitters of this era do. He hits up, rather than through his opponent. However, that doesn't necessarily mean he was targeting Booth's head. Booth was in a bit of a vulnerable position because he made one small error on his backhand pass. As soon as he released the puck as he cuts to the middle of the ice, he turns his head back to watch the pass. So now, he's looking one way and going the other and Mike Richards had him in the tracks. If Booth doesn't make that little peak, chances are he still gets clobbered…but is able to brace himself a bit. As for Richards hitting up on Booth, it definitely happens a little bit, but it's not as severe as these hits by notorious open ice hitters like Dion Phaneuf and Niklas Kronwall.

The other major controversy about this hit is the perception that it was late. Well, if you count the time on the slow motion replay, it certainly seems late. However, in real time, it's less than a second. In fact, Steve Kouleas from The Score broke down the video frame by frame and it was less than half a second from the time Booth passed the puck and got hit. What's that mean? It means it's a legal play in that regard.

As for Booth, he's concussed and his return date will depend on how he responds to treatment, previous concussion history and outside of confirming that he will indeed live, there is no way to say how long he will be out of the Panthers' lineup.

Getting back to the hit itself, it's not unlike the 2006 Playoffs when RJ Umberger was caught looking down by Brian Campbell or the hit last Wednesday by Willie Mitchell on Jonathan Toews.

It all three cases, the player with the puck looks down momentarily after the puck leaves his stick and unfortunately takes a shoulder check to the chin. Does it make the hits dirty? No. The hits are both textbook open ice hits and would have been deemed so in any era. So, why is it today that a hit like the one we saw on Saturday was considered so vicious, so damaging and the topic of message boards, sports show debates and blogs like this one about whether or not Richards deserved a suspension and whether the NHL needs a rule specifically to penalize hits to the head?

For starters, Richards received a five minute major for interference and a game misconduct for intent to injure, so it wasn't as if he got away free of punishment. The biggest issue on hits like this is how the recipient leaves the ice. In this case, David Booth left on a stretcher with a concussion after laying motionless for a few minutes. Obviously, no one wants to see ever see that, but where are we supposed to attribute the blame if a textbook body check in open ice ends with a stretcher? And how come we are seeing this more often now than any other time in hockey history?

My first thought takes me to the shoulder and elbow pad section of any sports store. It's obvious that equipment is safer now than ever should you fall on your elbow or shoulder or tailbone, etc. However, in hockey players hit each other with their shoulders, and although illegal, elbows. So that means that the very same hard, moulded plastic caps designed to save injuries to the shoulders and elbows likely will contact another player during any given game.

But there's more to the issue than just the gear itself. The players in the NHL today – outside of some of the older players in the twilight of their careers – all grew up playing fully decked out with plastic shoulder and elbow pads, along with helmets with full face shields and mouth guards. Now, I'm not saying this is a bad thing…I played in all that same stuff and am quite happy I did. However, it does change the mentality of players a little bit. From a young age, these guys knew they were covered head to toe in protective equipment and as a result, a level of invincibility entered the game. In minor hockey, a shoulder to the chin would hit a cage, not the face itself, thus protecting the player from the full force of the hit. The same goes for the lightweight composite sticks. The players in minor hockey may take a stick to the face, but the cage protects them from the cuts we see at the pro level…and unfortunately, bad habits die hard so when the select few make it to the big leagues, they're completely used to hitting cages with shoulders, elbows and sticks that it translates up each level.

The other issue is size. At some point in the last 15 or 20 years, professional hockey put an emphasis on bigger players and it's not just height. Players are now entering the league at 18-21 years old and considered slight if they don't weigh close to 200 lbs. Of course, this filters into junior and minor hockey, with players working out specifically to add bulk in hopes to get noticed and make the next step. What is normal in the NHL now was considered big not too long ago.

So…what does it all mean and how does it all relate to the Mike Richards hit on David Booth? Richards hit was no more malicious than the big open ice hits of the 60's, 70's, 80's or early 90's. However, because he's heavier at 5'10" than most players that height in those eras, combined with wearing harder equipment than players from back then, the effects were bound to be worse. Combine that with the slight upswing hitting style prevalent in the NHL today means we are going to see more players carted off the ice and into ambulances rather than skating to the bench…whether the league adds a rule against shoulder-to-head hits or not.

Money Malarkey!

Written by Wayne Coristine

Remember a few years back, when Gary Bettman and the suits running the league and its teams told us how important it would be to get a new Collective Bargaining Agreement? Remember when they used terms like "cost certainty" and "hard salary cap" to convince us that a work stoppage was likely…and necessary for the financial health of the NHL? Remember when the league was on ESPN for American fans (and there actually are a few, they just have no clue where to watch games anymore)?

But don't worry, Gary Bettman's deal with the Outdoor Life Network..err…Versus to carry games in the US really raised the profile of the league…yup, all 30% (at best) of American households with the network sure brought back lost fans and recruited new ones…same with the multi-concessions, no-money deal to have NBC cover about 15 games a year…in the afternoon no less.

Well, maybe, just maybe, we got misled. It's possible that the NHL power brokers pulled a fast one on us. While the revenues are being shared and the player-league partnership means that teams aren't spending more than 54% of their earnings on salaries and rich teams prop up the money bleeders. Hooray. We got our cost certainty and the hard salary cap works to perfection, right?

Wrong. Somewhere along the line…and we believe it was July 1, 2006, the guys holding the purses went nutty…as purse-carrying men are apt to do. You see, the "hard-cap" means General Managers can't spend more than 56 million bucks on their rosters this year – about the same as last year, after increasing from 48 million after the work stoppage…stopped. But teams started going crazy for free agents the same way they did before…only now with ridiculously long contracts. And the rule about the maximum you can spend on a player per year? Well that would have worked well…had there not been easy ways around it. Front load a big money contract then stretch it out over several years to bring down the annual cap hit, and bam! You've got players making far more than their cap number for a few years, then far below as they taper off. We're looking at you, Detroit. Not a bad move by the General Managers, but it reflects poorly on the league's ironclad CBA to skirt around the rule so easily.

So, we decided to look into the bad money being tossed around the league despite all the cost certainty we were promised as a trade off for a long, hockey free winter. We looked at 25 of the worst contracts handed out by general managers in the salary cap era and how they affected (or will affect) their teams.

No Chance of Return on Investment

1. SHAWN HORCOFF, Oilers - 5 years, $33 million. This is quite possibly the worst contract in hockey for plenty of reasons. The Oilers were the poster child of needing the lockout to be able to compete for players…so what do they do? They still whiff on free agents and, under the flawed guidance of Kevin Lowe, vastly overpaid their own players (Fernando Pisani, Steve Staios) based on a small sample of play rather than the entire body of work. Horcoff is a decent hockey player, but his value was maxed at his previous $3.6 million average, so how he deserved a 65% raise, we'll never know. No way he gets close to this number if they had let him go to Unrestricted Free Agency.

1. CHRIS DRURY, Rangers - 5 years, $35.25 million. Chris Drury sure knows how to define a career early huh? Score a few monster playoff goals and get the label clutch. Then go to unrestricted free agency after a career year and hit pay dirt. Of course, when Glen Sather is signing your cheques, you're very likely to get vastly overpaid and end up on our list (we call that foreshadowing!). Drury is the first of four Sather signings to earn at least $7 million in a season…and be nowhere near worth it.
   

2. SCOTT GOMEZ, Canadiens (signed by Rangers) - 7 years, $51.5 million. This was a bad day for hockey. July 1, 2007 was the day Glen Sather signed two good players to great player contracts. Between Gomez and Drury, the Rangers were on the hook for 17 million clams in 2007-08…with Gomez taking in 10 mil. We don't know what's worse: Gomez's albatross contract, or the fact the Canadiens were foolish enough to trade valuable assets to New York as part of the Rangers obvious contract dump.
   

3. WADE REDDEN, Rangers - 6 years, $39 million. Sather didn't just overvalue plateaued centres. No sir, he decided to beef up the blue line by committing massive term and dollars to a guy clearly on the decline. Redden went from elite puckmover to elite dud is an awful hurry…but at least he can afford to live anywhere in New York City on these dollars.
   

4. MICHAL ROSZIVAL, Rangers - 4 years, $20 million. He made SEVEN million dollars in first year of deal, 6 million in second year. Not bad for a guy that's never been an all-star and isn't about to start now.
   

5. MICHAL NYLANDER, Capitals - 4 years, $19.5 million. This was very close to being yet another bad Kevin Lowe signing. Instead, it's a bad George McPhee signing…and Washington is trying as hard as they can to loan Nylander to the KHL and get him the hell off the books.
   

6. ROMAN HAMRLIK, Canadiens - 4 years, $22 million. Hamrlik can definitely help a team's powerplay. But for a $5.5 million ticket, he better tape everybody's stick, balance the books and fly the team's plane. We wonder if Bob Gainey negotiated those terms in the deal…
   

7. JASON BLAKE, Maple Leafs - 5 years, $20 million. Former Leafs GM John Ferguson Jr. penned players to few good deals and a lot of really, really bad ones…like the one to Jason Blake. Of course, Blake fooled a few people by scoring 40 goals in his contract year for the Islanders. While he does have decent hands to net 20-25 goals per year, the 40 was as big an anomaly as this contract is bad. Having his career year at 34 was the peak, not the beginning of the ascent.
   

Long-Term Lockups or Potential Problems?

1. RICK DiPIETRO, Islanders - 15 years, $67.5 million. When we first heard about this deal, we were shocked at the term. However, it also didn't seem like THAT bad of a deal when you look at DiPietro's skill and the cap hit. However, the risk of injury to goalies is high and Slick Rick's hips, knees and everything in between seem to be brittle as can be. The Islanders gambled big and got the second worst case scenario out of it…after all of us ending up dead of course.
   

2. MARIAN HOSSA, Blackhawks - 12 years, $63 million. Somehow, this deal got the league's attention about super long contracts circumventing the cap. Never mind that his former team, the Detroit Red Wings handed out fairly similar deals just months prior to two of their stars. Never mind the fact that the Wings wanted to re-sign Hossa to a similar style deal to remain in Detroit. However, the league should be looking at all these deals. Players signing 8+ year, front-loaded contracts at the back end of their prime isn't good for the game. Hossa will help Chicago for up to two thirds of this deal, but is paying a lot more money than is necessary really a good business model?
   

3. ROBERTO LUONGO, Canucks - 12 years, $81 million. Luongo and the Canucks signed this deal on the heels of the league investigating the Hossa contract in Chicago and yet the NHL doesn't say a peep about it. Because, really, what's wrong with signing a 30 year old goalie to a 12-year deal? It's not like he's already had a major leg issue and it's not like butterfly goalies aren't prone to breaking down in the hips, groins, hamstrings, and knees. Plus, unlike Hossa, the last three years on this contract aren't below the magical million dollar number…so the Canucks aren't sneaking around the cap like Chicago.
   

4. HENRIK ZETTERBERG, Red Wings - 12 years, $73 million. Funny how Ken Holland signs this deal and the media calls him a genius and the league sees no issue with it. A cap number of just over $6 mil for Zetterberg is good value and we won't dispute that…but the funky accounting to get Hank his full 73 million bucks and allow the Wings to afford their other stars should have raised a red flag…but the league obviously enjoys raising Red banners to the rafters.
   

5. JOHAN FRANZEN, Red Wings - 11 years, $43.5 million. If the Zetterberg deal didn't raise any red flags, this one should have sounded an alarm…complete with flashing red lights. Franzen is a very, very good power forward. However, that style of play combined with his age and history in the infirmary should be proof that he's not going to play all 11 years in Detroit. But the Mule will still collect almost $40 million before walking gingerly in retirement.
   

6. VINCENT LECAVALIER, Lightning - 11 years, $85 million. Rumours flew they wanted to unload this contract the same way they did Dan Boyle's (sign the big money extension, then trade him before it kicks in)…now they're on the hook for $78.5 million in the first eight years for a 29-year old player who looks like something is amiss. Our prediction: This will be one of many deals that will be looked back on during a "what were they thinking?" feature on TSN.
   

7. DANIEL BRIERE, Flyers - 8 years, $52 million. The Flyers signed Briere the same summer the Rangers signed Drury and Gomez in what could have been the silliest free agent frenzy of all time. Briere is a good little player and was coming off a career year (are we seeing a pattern here?) in Buffalo. In Philly, he hasn't been close to reproducing those numbers, but at least they can use his many injuries as salary cap relief…thanks, Long Term Injury List!
   

8. BRIAN CAMPBELL, Blackhawks - 8 years, $57 million. We all knew Campbell was going somewhere for huge money – and a huge overpayment – in the summer of 2008. But nobody thought Chicago was that destination. The Hawks are loaded with younger – and better – defencemen and yet still big bucks and term to Campbell. Dale Tallon was a great builder and trader as GM, but his free agency record was puzzling.
   

9. MATTIAS OHLUND, Lightning - 7 years, $25.25 million. As Elliotte Friedman pointed out in his blog on CBC.ca ten days ago, how can the Lightning sign this deal three minutes after the free agency period opens without tampering in any way? That's a long deal for an aging Swede with injury issues…and a big price to pay for a mentor to Viktor Hedman. Of course, we could do a bad contract list of strictly Tampa Bay Lightning…
   

Deals We Just Flat Out Don't Like

1. BRAD RICHARDS, Stars (signed by Lightning) - 5 years, $39 million. Five years ago, Richards was the Conn Smythe winner on a Cup-winning Lightning team that featured Martin St Louis, Vincent Lecavalier, Nikolai Khabibulin and Dan Boyle. Apparently, the team thought he deserved $7.8 mil for his efforts only to be let down…now with the Stars, Richards can't stay healthy…or produce points.
   

2. JAROSLAV SPACEK, Canadiens - 3 years, $11.5 million. Pretty soon the Royal Tyrell Museum is going to ask the Habs for permission to explore the fossils on their blue line.
   

3. KEITH BALLARD, Panthers - 6 years, $25.2 million. Really? Keith Ballard is worth $4.2 million a year? Well, at least the Panthers can afford to pay him that with all the money they bring in from giving out free tickets.
   

4. CRISTOBAL HUET, Blackhawks - 5 years, $22.5 million. For a goalie that looked good in Montreal and Washington, Huet looks to be challenging himself to see how quickly he can lose the starting job. This was another of Tallon's confusing signings.
   

5. J-S GIGUERE, Ducks - 4 years, $24 million. Remember when Giguere was considered one of the game's best goalies? Sorry, remember when his gigantic pads were considered one of the best goaltenders in the league?
   

6. CHRIS PRONGER, Flyers - 7 years, $34.45 million. The dollars aren't a problem for one of the elite defencemen in the league. And he's a perfect fit in Philly. But we don't like the seven years because of his age. At least the Flyers can't escape the cap hit if he retires because he signed the deal the year he turned 35….you know, that rule in the CBA to discourage teams from massively overpaying veterans on the downturn of their careers.
   

7. ED JOVANOVSKI, Coyotes - 5 years, $32.5 million. Jovocop at a $6.5 million cap number? The Coyotes are bankrupt? Weird.
   

8. DAVID LEGWAND, Predators - 6 years, $27 million. The Pred's prized draft pick is now 29 years old, has two 20-goal seasons on his resume and is pretty much a bust as second overall pick. Better hand him $4.5 million anyway.
   

This list could go on and on because NHL executives who fought hard to get cost certainty and a salary cap quickly forgot all about that. Instead, they spend money like drunken sailors…and often not on the most desirable wench in the bar. However, one former General Manager really takes the cake. The one executive, whose team was the poster child for getting to the lockout to be competitive, signed bad deal after bad deal and made questionable trades in the new era…Kevin Lowe. We decided to give a quick rundown of a few of his deals to illustrate why the Oilers missed the playoffs for three years running.

1. SHELDON SOURAY - 5 years, $27 million. The Oilers were reeling after Chris Pronger asked for a trade…and Lowe muffed that too. He wanted to replace the former Hart and Norris defenceman, so he went out and paid big money for a one dimensional player. Souray's big slap shot is great on the powerplay, but his unwillingness to hit and his horrendous defensive play did not warrant 5.4 million clams a year.
   

2. DUSTIN PENNER - 5 years, $21.25 million. Although Penner is playing much better this year, there was no reason for the Oilers to sign him. They needed to accept a rebuild and instead Lowe threw huge cash at the restricted free agent after his offer sheet for Thomas Vanek (7 years, $50 million) was matched in Buffalo. To borrow a line from the great Steve Ludzik, we admire Lowe's courage, but question his judgment.
   

3. LUBOMIR VISNOVSKY - 5 years, $28 million. While Lowe didn't sign this deal, he did trade Jarret Stoll and Matt Greene to Los Angeles for it. The result? The Oilers biggest needs the next season were a right-handed faceoff man and a stay-at-home, punishing defencemen, aka the guys Lowe dealt. On top of that, Visnovsky got hurt and the Oilers learned they have a wealth of puck moving guys like him…who are younger and cheaper than his $5.6 million cap hit. As for the Los Kings, their seven defencemen this year make a combined $10.787 million.
   

4. RYAN SMYTH - 5 years, $31.25 million. Lowe refused to cave to Smyth's asking price and was right to do so. Smyth is over 30 and plays a style that gets him injured often. However, how does it make any sense for Lowe to tell Smyth he's not worth the $5-6 million he was seeking, then turn around and give that kind of money to Shawn Horcoff?
   

Edmonton Oilers Season Preview – Pre-Training Camp Edition

It's time for another high point on the professional hockey calendar. The time where players slowly filter into town after their long summers of training – because playing golf, hanging out at their vacation lake of choice (or as they call it in eastern Canada, "Cottage Country"), and working out several times a week is all part of the millionaire athlete's summer day job in preparation for the upcoming season. For a fan and amateur sportswriter like me, this is the time of year where hope is sky high. No games played, still time for big trades, and no season-crippling losing streaks to wear out my profanity vocabulary…yet.

It's a time of year where the rosters aren't set and fans and media pretend that several jobs are on the line for their favourite team's players. Of course, in today's professional hockey world, with one-way contracts, big-money, long-term deals, and salary cap restrictions, there are but a few jobs truly contested in training camp. Despite the fact general manager Steve Tambellini in May promised Oiler fans big changes for the upcoming season, we are very likely going to see a similar roster as last year. But, with a new coaching staff (save for all-time NHL fights-lost leader Kelly Buchberger), it's quite possible the bubble players will change. With Craig MacTavish gone, every player will now need to prove himself to Pat Quinn and Tom Renney. This means no more benefit of the doubt for players like Shawn Horcoff, Ethan Moreau, Steve Staios, Sheldon Souray, and Sam Gagner, as well as a clean slate for former doghouse players Dustin Penner, Ladislav Smid, Robert Nilsson and Rob Schremp. For the first time in years, training camp will have a different feel in Edmonton, even if the roster is similar to last season's disappointing squad.

What's fun about this year is nobody really knows what to expect. We all have a rough idea that Pat Quinn will try to roll four lines more evenly than his predecessor, that Tom Renney will help the woeful penalty kill and defence, that we could see a very different Dustin Penner – who will still be accused of being overweight and out of by the world's most petty and fickle group: sportswriters. What we don't know is far more exciting. Most of the Oilers only played for one coach in the NHL prior to now. How will guys react to different roles, different minutes and different line mates? For the last several years, we knew that Ales Hemsky would be stuck with Shawn "Whiff" Horcoff as his centre. It could happen again this year, or maybe not…who knows?

The biggest problem facing this team is that they aren't the biggest. Up front, the Oilers are almost comically small. I read a recent glass-half-full take on their lack of size, comparing these Oilers to the Buffalo Sabres of a few years ago. At first I thought, "Those Sabres went to the Conference Finals!" then I thought…"in the Eastern Conference." Unfortunately, the Eastern Conference style is not as physical as the Western Conference, so these Oilers are in for a real fight. Up front, the Oilers have small and/or and not-so-physical players in Andrew Cogliano (22), Mike Comrie (29), Sam Gagner (20), Ales Hemsky (26), Shawn Horcoff (30), Robert Nilsson (24), Patrick O'Sullivan (24), Fernando Pisani (32), and Marc Pouliot (24). And that doesn't include the bubble players like Gilbert Brule (22), Jordan Eberle (19), Ryan O'Marra (22), Ryan Potulny (25), Liam Reddox (23) or Rob Schremp (23). Mix in the few big, physical players in J-F Jacques (24), Steve MacIntyre (29), Ethan Moreau (33), Dustin Penner (27), Ryan Stone (24), Zach Stortini (23), Viacheslav Trukno (22) and you have an interesting mix of skill, speed and toughness…unfortunately, no one player features all three traits.

What's particularly worrisome with the forwards is their lack of top end talent. Outside of Ales Hemsky, not one of these players is remotely close to being a point-per-game threat. The offensive players – interpret the term as you see fit – are all small with the potential to score. The bright side of bringing Mike Comrie back into the fold, is that at least now the Oilers have a 30 goal scorer at the NHL level…unfortunately, Comrie hasn't accomplished the feat in several years, but at least now he's injury prone! However, having only one or two proven scorers in the line-up while being up against the salary cap and trying to convince fans this is a playoff contender is going to be one hell of a chore.

On the back end, the Oilers have Tom Gilbert (26), Dennis Grebeshkov (25), Ladislav Smid (23), Sheldon Souray (33), Steve Staios (36), Jason Strudwick (36) and Lubomir Visnovsky (33). Unfortunately, Smid, Staios and Strudwick are the only ones that so much as attempt body checks, with Staios and Strudwick long in the tooth and slow footed. I like Jason Strudwick as the next Sportsnet Colour Commentator, but as the seventh defenseman, he eats a spot better suited for Taylor Chorney (22) or Theo Peckham (21). With the current defence core's long injury history, it's a given that one or both young players will play in the NHL this year. It's just too bad they have to wait for at least two injuries for it to be a reality.

The biggest problem that plagues this blue line is that Kevin Lowe was the architect. After the Chris Pronger fiasco, Lowe was desperate to get a puck moving defenseman to replace him. So he overpaid for the one dimensional Sheldon "Thunder Throat" Souray and his slap shot. Then, in quite possibly the stupidest – but amazingly not worst – trade of his tenure as general manager, Lowe traded two younger players in Jarrett Stoll (27) and Matt Greene (27) for Lubomir Visnovsky. Now the Oilers have two expensive, old power play specialists who don't hit and don't defend well and going in to camp sorely lacks a right-handed faceoff specialist/penalty killer and bruising stay-at-home defenseman. The result of those moves left Oilers with four offensive-minded defensemen and no punisher. To add salt to the wounds, the cost of offensive defensemen is usually about twice that of stay-at-home defensemen, pushing the team even closer to the cap.

Going into this season, there is some hope on the back end, despite the hefty price tag. Smid, to me at least, looks like could play a similar style to Niklas Kronwall in Detroit. If and when Peckham gets the call to the big club, the Oilers could finally have the punishing pair of defensive blue liners they've sorely needed for at least two years. Behind Chorney and Peckham are Alex Plante, Matt Nickerson and Johan Motin manning the Springfield Falcons defence.

Finally, let's look between the pipes. When Dwayne Roloson (40) decided he wouldn't accept a one-year contract and will continue to fossilize elsewhere (and oddly enough, in an even worse three goalie system), Tambellini brought in Nikolai Khabibulin from Chicago. Although I'm not enamoured by the four year term for a 36-year-old goalie because there is literally no way out of the cap hit if he stinks up the joint during his tenure, it wasn't a terrible move. In fact, as a goaltender, he's better than Roloson and with the new coaching staff, we'll finally get to see what Jeff Drouin-Deslauriers (25) can do with 25-30 games. The term of the Khabibulin deal is also a bit strange since goaltending is the position the Oilers have the most depth (and oddly enough, size) with Devan Dubnyk (23) and even Olivier Roy (18) waiting in the wings. But I'd rather have an embarrassment of riches in the system than some of the questionable tandems we've seen here in previous years.

Training camp kicks into gear in a few days and we all get to bask in the fact that the Oilers have the potential to score goals, have a new coach and the goats of the old regime no longer have to fight an uphill battle from day one. We'll see how all the players adapt to the new system and who might make the leap from the minors or junior hockey to the big club. We'll see how former favourite fare with having to prove themselves for the first time in years. We'll see new line combinations and hopefully it leads to a much hungrier team than last year's edition. But for now, let's sit back, see who shines in camp, and assess the team again after they pare the roster down to 23 players for the regular season.

Hypocrisy in the NHL Office? NEVER….

I woke up this morning to an interesting story in the Ottawa Sun by Bruce Garrioch: "'Hawks under microscope, NHL investigating Hossa contract." Apparently, the NHL is not happy with the 12-year, $62.8 million dollar contract Chicago gave to a 30-year old Marian Hossa. Now, on one hand my sentiment is "it's about [expletive deleted] time the NHL stepped in on these mega deals!" On the other hand, I wonder why this particular deal is a red flag, but the not one, but two deals signed by Detroit Red Wings GM Ken Holland in the last year are fine and dandy in the eyes of the league's boss and perennial idiot-of-the-year candidate, Gary Bettman. The Red Wings, Hossa's previous team oddly enough, signed Henrik Zetterberg to a 12-year, $80.4 million on January 28, 2009 and then signed Johan Franzen to an 11-year, $43.505 million deal on April 11, 2009.

Here's the annual value breakdown for each contract:

Zetterberg (Annual Cap Hit: $6.055 million)

$7.4 million, $7.75 million, $7.75 million, $7.75 million, $7.5 million, $7.5 million, $7.5 million, $7.5 million, $3.35 million, $1.0 million, $1.0 million

Franzen (Annual Cap Hit: $3.955 million)

$5.5 million, $5.0 million, $5.25 million, $5.25 million, $5.0 million, $5.0 million, $5.0 million, $3.5 million, $2.0 million, $1.0 million, $1.0 million

Hossa (Annual Cap Hit: $5.23 million)

$7.9 million, $7.9 million, $7.9 million, $7.9 million, $7.9 million, $7.9 million, $7.9 million, $4.0 million, $1.0 million, $1.0 million, $750,000, $750,000

The NHL might argue that the final four years of the Hossa deal are throwaway years because the cap hit is $5.23 million but the total value is only $3.5 million. Or that the structure allows the contract value to greatly exceed his cap hit for seven years then in the final four years be greatly below. Obviously, the Wings used similar structures but were more subtle in the annual values in relation to the cap hit. But that doesn't make this an apples-to-oranges situation; it's more like a Spartan to Red Delicious situation.

Zetterberg turns 29 this October and Franzen turns 30 in December…making him 11 months younger than Hossa. So, is the Hossa deal offside because he's older than both Red Wing players? Well, according to the NHL's Deputy Commissioner, Bill Daly, it's seems to be an issue: "This was the first of the long-term contracts that took a player out past the age 40…" However, there is not real benefit to this argument because a player doesn't hit 40 and get a hell of a lot worse than he was at 39 years old. In fact, the real problem, as Daly points out is "…the value of the contract in its 'out years' was dramatically lower than its early years. We want to know if the possibility of player retirement was ever discussed or even contemplated."

Interesting take, however, that's the whole point of any of these long-term deals: they salary cap hit disappears for the team if the player retires before the end of the contract. If he doesn't, well the team has the option to send the player to the minors and not have the contract count against their salary cap because they signed the deal before the player was 35-years old. That, my friends is circumventing the cap. Of course, the Chicago Blackhawks are guilty of it. So are the Detroit Red Wings and any other team that signs these deals. However, as Al Strachan pointed out Hardcore Hockey Talk after the Zetterberg and Franzen signings, the Wings were able to get around the question of "how likely is it that either player will even be on your roster at 40 years old?" by saying "Well, look at (Chris) Chelios!"

At the time of those contracts, Gary Bettman publicly stated that neither of the Red Wing deals circumvented the Collective Bargaining Agreement. He didn't give any reason why, but one can assume you don't want to step in on the defending Stanley Cup Champions and league darlings. One thing has to be perfectly clear: the Detroit Red Wings are an incredibly well run professional sports franchise. Ken Holland has kept the core of his super power team together longer than any other hockey team in the salary cap era. This team went from spending around $70 million dollars a year on players to being forced to play within the confines of a salary cap system and made the transition smoothly. Their management team also finds more players off the scrap heap and turns them into vital players – and some into stars – than any other team in the league. They also find the loopholes in the CBA faster than any other team and I can't fault them for any of it.

I can, however fault the league. Allowing the Franzen and Zetterberg deals opened up a can of worms. Enter the Chicago Blackhawks. They saw a player in Marian Hossa that they wanted and knew it would take a Franzen/Zetterberg-style deal to get him under contract. So, they crunched the numbers to get an affordable cap hit and made the offer. Hossa signed and at the time, the league approved it. 'Hawks swipe Hossa from Wings. Should be the end of the story; it isn't.

If you look back a month ago, the Red Wings were actually trying to get Hossa on a similar deal. A June 27 story by Anser Khan of mlive.com in Detroit quotes Wings Red Wings General Manager Ken Holland: "If there's a (salary) cap number we think can fit in, we'll sign him. We're prepared to do a long-term deal," The story goes on to say, "Sources said the team is offering Hossa a front-loaded deal in the neighbourhood of $4 million a season."

Now, to get Hossa to that kind of cap hit on a front-loaded, long-term deal, the Wings would have needed to get even more creative than the Blackhawks. The league allowed this situation to happen by allowing teams to extend older players to longer deals. What makes this one different is it was an Unrestricted Free Agent, leading to a bidding war and a substantial overpayment. The NHL can't really blame the Blackhawks for something they allowed to happen in the past.

Remember Daly's question about retirement being negotiated in the deal? Well if it wasn't negotiated in these deals, it's most likely assumed. A league executive tells Garrioch of another league plan: "The NHL is looking to put a damper on these 10-plus-year contracts with throwaway years tacked on at the end," a league executive said last night. "They are building a strong case against Chicago to make an example of them. This issue won't just go away. Lots of other GMs are supporting the league here."

There is a simple solution to this for the NHL and NHLPA: Create a new rule that limits the mega-term deal. I don't necessarily mean abolish the 10-year-or-longer deals; limit who gets them. Here's my crazy idea…

The CBA has a rule in place that buying out or sending players to the minors because of unsavoury contracts signed by players after they turn 35 will count against the salary cap. To work with that rule and not to artificially lower the cap number, teams should only be able to sign players to mega-term contracts up to the year they turn 35.

The reason is quite simple really. The best players in the league generally have their best years between the ages of 23 and 30. Depending on which month a player is born, that could mean seven or eight seasons. Teams can then sign star players to ten- or twelve-year contract and pay the player prime dollars during their prime years while getting a lower cap number. It also means being able to build the team around the superstar by lowering his cap hit. Therefore, the maximum length of a player's contract depends on how many years he has until he turns 35. After that, it's "buyer beware" and teams are a lot smarter when they're forced to face contractual consequences and the rule in place could actually have some teeth.

There are examples of teams doing this already mostly with good results. In Philadelphia, captain Mike Richards signed a deal that pays him gradually more to his peak years and gradually less towards his mid thirties. It is the poster child for what mega-term deals should be and he walks away with $69 million dollars. The mega-term deal is not without its risks. Just as the New York Islanders, who are paying goaltender Rick DiPietro $4.5 million a year for 15 years only to find he has an injury list rivalled only by that of Ken Griffey Jr. It's still buyer beware, but at least under this structure teams would sign players to realistic mega deals, not ones where they expect players to disappear and cap money to open up.

The mega-term deal is just one of the many hypocrisies synonymous with the Gary Bettman NHL. For a great breakdown of the ridiculous situation with the Phoenix Coyotes, check out my friend Scott Tougas' great blog on the subject.

Free Agent Season Takes a Back Seat to Dany Heatley

While the draft is usually the official kick off to the summer transaction bonanza, this year it served as a dud. Outside of the Philadelphia Flyers going for broke after Chris Pronger, the 2009 Draft was all about, well, the draft. Unless you count Kyle Brodziak for picks as a blockbuster, the real opener for deals was July 1^st, the time when every General Manager leaves his brains at home and gets the keys to the owners' vault. Of course, depending on the man running the team, this can be a good day or a real head scratcher.

The most obvious thing about – as TSN calls it during their ten hour broadcast – the Free Agent Frenzy, is that bargains don't exist. How else do you explain the deals that perennial overvaluation expert Glen Sather hands out? Teams desperate to get back to contention throw the keys to the organization at good but not always great players and teams at the top look to add pieces to keep them there while knowing other players are likely to walk away for greener financial pastures due to salary cap restrictions. It's a time of bedlam, with the odd blockbuster trade mixed in too.

This July 1 was no different. However, before we even got to the official opening of the floodgates, we were bombarded with the debate about what a couple of creepy twins (I'm no expert in translation and thanks to Brian Burke I know Sedin is not Swedish for "hook or hold me or punch me in the face in a scrum," but rather "figuratively conjoined") and the annual Scott Niedermayer "will he or won't he return" story. But all that pales in comparison to the absolute botch job of agents J.P. Barry and Stacey McAlpine in handling Dany Heatley's trade request.

Heatley of course started this mess by asking out of an organization that not only helped him significantly during his worst time by acquiring him from Atlanta; they also gave him a very player-friendly long-term contract complete with no-trade clause. Heatley's job is to play hockey to the best of his abilities and collect a king's ransom to do it. His agents' job is to secure the best deal for him, and professionally handle trade requests and limit public relations disasters. This is where they fail and fail miserably. While the request became public during the playoffs was a terrible idea, it is nothing compared to the mess when the Oiler trade was presented.

J.P. Barry, who was in Sweden with the Sedin twins on one of the busiest days of the NHL calendar, openly states that the Senators didn't work hard enough to make Dany Heatley happy. They didn't take Barry's advice on how to make trades. He even goes as far as saying that the Senators had other offers out there that were better than a three-young-roster-players-for-one deal.

"Bryan insists that he never really had any other options, which I completely disagree with," Barry told ESPN.com on Thursday from Stockholm. "I believe there were several potential options. I think it was clearly their intent to trade him to Edmonton and only Edmonton. That was the approach they took.

"I specifically told him two days ago, long before the trade happened, 'Do not trade him to Edmonton until you have other options.' And he turned around and consummated the trade despite my request. The result of which is that I get a phone call from a guy that I really respect in Steve Tambellini, who was excited, and I had to inform him what happened.

"I think it was completely mishandled by [Murray]. It was a pressure tactic. He loaded up the gun and put the gun against our heads."

Instead of helping create a solution that helps everyone involved and limits the damage to Heatley's already tattered reputation, J.P. Barry essentially throws gasoline on the fire by telling the Senators how to do their business.

The team, on the other hand, accepted a list of teams that Heatley would accept a trade to and while Edmonton was not on it; Darren Millard mentioned that, when asked if he would accept Edmonton, Heatley said he would consider it.

On top of that, the Heatley camp seems convinced that the Senators are making this harder than it has to be by only dealing with one team, despite their requests and obvious disregard for the realities of the National Hockey League salary cap era.

"We advised Bryan continually that Dany requires more than one option [team] to make a decision and, as of last night, we still only had one option, so he still wasn't able to make a decision, given that there still was only one option in front of him," Barry said.

So, where does J.P. Barry figure the better deals are?

Barry said the New York Rangers, a team that was on Heatley's list of desired destinations, had a good offer on the table.

"Based on my understanding of the discussions that took place with the Rangers, the options the Rangers provided were every bit as good, or better, than the options provided by Edmonton," Barry said. "But I'm sure Bryan has a different opinion of that."

However, the Rangers signed another player with significant baggage to a five-year, $7.5 million per contract in the oft injured Marian Gaborik and their offer involves massively overpaid Michal Roszival (another Sather contract gem at a $5 million annual ticket) and Nikolai Zherdev, who has a lot of tools but a reputation for disappearing for long stretches. Not exactly a huge return for one of the league's most consistent goal scorers.

If he figures that teams are lining up for Heatley and prepared to offer a bounty for him, he's dreaming at this point. Even the L.A. Kings – who desperately want to make a splash with a marquee player in the second biggest market in the United States, have a major need for a top line left winger and have money to spend are leery of the guy. Kings assistant GM Ron Hextall sums up the Heatley baggage as why they aren't actively pursuing him.

"If you look at this player's past ... I'm going to spell it out to you as nicely I can," began Hextall, "He was in Atlanta, had an unfortunate (automobile) accident there and asked to be traded. OK, given the circumstances -- there was a young man killed -- I can live with that.

"He goes to Ottawa, he's on a pretty good team, they go to the finals, signs a big contract…Bang, all of the sudden now he's got to be traded again. ' Not only do I have to be traded, I have a no-trade clause. I want to pick where I'm going to go.' Well, there are some issues there.

"He had problems with his coach in Atlanta," Hextall continued. "My understanding is he had problems with Craig Hartsburg at the start of last year in Ottawa, and he had problems with…Cory Clouston. Three coaches, he's had a problem with.

"That raises huge red flags for us."

Not exactly a glowing endorsement for a player with Heatley's skill. And for a guy with a history of problems with coaches, it's odd he'd want to play for Kings head coach Terry Murray - whose brother Bryan is the Senators' GM.

The damage to Heatley's reputation is extensive and in my eyes Heatley should consider switching agents to try to save himself from further tarnish. His bad decisions combined with poor advice makes a player who should be highly sought after a toxic asset. While it may be easy to hide from the spotlight all summer in Kelowna, continuing with this approach is likely to lead him farther and farther away from his aspirations of New York City or California…and likely back to Ottawa.

Of course, there is one easy solution in all of this for the league and Players' Association to consider: a rule to discourage these requests. Something along the lines that players with no-movement clauses who request trades forfeit control over where they end up. After all, players earn the right for a no-trade specifically not to leave that city and team. After all, if a players want to choose where they go, they should wait for unrestricted free agency. There's even a day designated for it.

 

Sources:

 

http://sports.espn.go.com/nhl/

http://www.sportsnet.ca/hockey/

http://twitter.com/darenmillard/status/2428467601