Calling Out The Media

Down Goes Brown says:

Beyond that, both Berger and Garrioch are guilty of one of the most frustrating sins in modern journalism: thinking your audience is actually interested in journalism. We're not. We're interested in what you're covering, not the act of you covering it. And journalists everywhere, whether they cover sports or politics or entertainment, seem to forget this.

(emphasis mine)

Yeah.

Cognitive Dissonance

So to review:

• Toronto comes to Ottawa to play a hockey game.
  
• With two and a half minutes to play in the third, Toronto is one point back.
  
• Toronto Coach Wilson calls for a stick measurement on Jason Spezza.
  
• Spezza's stick is deemed illegal, and Spezza is sent to the penalty box for two minutes.
  
• Toronto fails to win the game.
  
• Coach Wilson admits that he's knowns Spezza had an illegal stick all season, but decided to wait until a potentially game-changing moment to call him on it.
  
• Coach Wilson gets all huffy that his integrity gets challenged over the call.

From Pension Plan Puppets:

Well, there you have it. Working Class Howard did question Ron Wilson's integrity by suggesting that he sat on the stick measurement back when it would have made more of a difference (I don't get it. Do you get more points for wins in November?). Ronnie's reply is spot on. They weren't down by a goal with just over two minutes left in those games. I guess the reason Wilson got so angry is because it's hard having your integrity challenged by someone that has shown that he does not possess any.

See, it's crap like this that makes people wonder about your integrity. If he knew about the stick and didn't call him on it, then either he was OK with the rules violation or he was respecting this nebulous "code" that the coaches have to turn their backs on each other's equipment... let's call them irregularities.

But he did call for the measurement, which means either he wasn't OK with the rules violation (which makes his earlier silence on the matter odd) or he doesn't care about this "code".

Yes, Spezza had an illegal stick. Yes, he deserved to get called on it. Yes, Wilson's actions are legal, strictly speaking, because the rule book doesn't explicitly say anything about you having a requirement to call out violations you know about in a timely manner.

Maybe it should. Maybe it should have a passage about preserving the integrity of the game.

But it's an angle-shot. It is a cheap, lite-beer call. It shatters the illusion that the teams are trying to play the game within both the spirit and the letter of the rules to the best of their abilities, and that the team with the best game wins, not the team with the best lawyer wins.

And for that, yes, Coach Wilson should have his integrity challenged.

Sadly this is perfectly fitting with the rest of the amateur-hour officiating that happens in this league.

(You know, the officiating that leads to the requirement that players be permitted to fight to deter blatant rules violating behavior.)

Irony

The Hockey Scanner reports on Murray's reaction to Gerber's win last night:

One wise-guy reporter saw Bryan Murray walking by after the Senators game and said, sarcastically, “guess you should have kept Gerber.” To which Murray shot back: “You guys ran him out of town.”

Heh.

Capology, 2009-10

The 6th Sens has a (warning, language) post up detailing the Senator's cap position for next season. It isn't good:

Now, let's humorously assume Bryan Murray follows through and retains both Chris Neil and Mike Comrie. [...] This would leave the Senators with approximately $1 to $1.5 million to improve their roster.

Now this assumes that there are not going to be any moves over the summer, but I think it is safe to assume that we are not going to be any major changes. The team still has to address the defense problem, even if we assume that those players graduating from the farm team can provide even a modicum of secondary scoring.

Put it all together, and right now there isn't much prospect for a lot of improvement in the results the team will get. Even the addition of a "legitimate starting goalie" won't do much to stem the losses if the defense doesn't get its act together and is capable of feeding the forwards properly.

Still, we are a long way from September, and after Deadline Day I'm more inclined to give Murray the benefit of the doubt right now. The problem is that on paper at least the team is threatening to dig itself into the same hole the Rangers find themselves in: big contracts with no production.

Gerber is a can't lose proposition

So Martin Gerber backstopped the Maple Leafs to a win last night over Washington. True, scoring machine Olvetchkin was out of the Capital's lineup, but Gerber hung tough and according to some managed to look pretty good.

It occurred to me that having Martin Gerber in Toronto is a can't lose proposition for Senators fans, because:

• if they win, they are further burying their potential draft position; and
• if they lose, they are the Leafs losing, and that's never bad.

About the only game Senators really care about is Monday's game with the Leafs in town; that one is still a must-win for both teams, even though there isn't much on the line except pride.

Still makes me laugh that the Leafs can't even tank a season properly after all these years of trying.

Capology, 2010-11

MF37 at the Bitter Leaf Fan Page explains why there were not any "blockbuster" trades and why first round draft picks were at a premium in the run-up to deadline day:

The key ingredients going foward will be a strong collection of cost-contained youth and players outperforming their contracts.

This will definitely have a downward pressure on contracts going forward. Even if a player like, say, Chris Neil is "worth" $2.5 million based on what other teams are currently paying comparable players; if none of the teams have the cap space to pay that $2.5 million, it becomes academic. Neil either takes a pay cut or is left out altogether. This could become the stark choice facing "premium" players as the current long-term contracts run out.

It also means going forward we are going to see even more volatility in the NHL coaching market; with more restrictions on even less cap space, GMs will have even less of an ability to buy their way out of the financial holes they dig. They will also be unable to dump their problem, premium contracts on other clubs since the cap issue will be widespread.

I think over the next two of three years we will see more in terms of younger looking teams, and those teams who luck-into and then develop the right cluster of talent will be the ones who have success. It goes without saying that since the teams currently near the bottom of the standings now have a better shot at the talent pool, although the element of lottery will continue.

What might be interesting going forward is that instead of paying premium players fixed amounts, players get a "cut" of the salary cap. So instead of paying a player $5 million of a %55 million salary cap, you tell him you'll pay him 9% of whatever the cap is that year. If the cap goes up, he gets a raise; if the cap goes down, the team still has room to maneuver. If everyone ends up with a percentage, it could make for more predictability.

Deadline Day Dealing 2009

So the Senators made one move, sending Antoine Vermette to Columbus in exchange for goalie Pascal Leclaire and a second round pick.

Leclaire is highly regarded for his skill; he led the league last year in shutouts with 9, while the world's greatest goalie¹ Martin Brodeur only had 3. The problem is that he is fragile too, as he hurt his ankle this year in training camp and as such has been out for long periods of time.

The second-round pick, eh, by the time you get to the second round you end up in a lottery as to whether or not your pick will even end up helping the farm team, let alone make it to the NHL. So that's like saying a lottery ticket is "worth" something. Maybe the team will get lucky, maybe they won't.

In exchange, we give up a center with good work ethic, an amazing face-off capability, who has the ability to score occasionally while making chances for the rest of the team -- which pretty much sums up what you want with your second or third line center. Will he develop into an elite center? Probably not at this point, but he should continue to be a good second- or third- line center. However this team is positively dripping in prospects for center, so while his departure creates a short-term hole, it isn't likely to be a long-term issue.

So on an asset-for-asset exchange, I think the Senators have done well by this trade.

But here's my problem with this trade: it implies that the main weakness on this team has been the goal tending, and in my opinion it has not. We don't have Martin Brodeur by any means, but the guys we have had (and then tried to run out of town) are not the amateur-hour players the media would have you believe.

This trade implies that Murray still believes he can tweak this team back into contention, that the team will be in a place to make a valid run next year or the year after.

The problem on this team continues to be the defense, and the lack of defensive discipline on the part of the forwards. Martin Gerber let in some soft goals, to be sure. But the rest of the squad basically hung him out to dry many, many times. The team was better in front of Auld, and better still (at times) in front of Elliot; but consistent defensive play is still something we look for rather than take for granted.

My point: not even Martin Brodeur would look good with this team in front of him.

The Senators still lack two top-two defense players, and that will have to be on Murray's to-do list as he watches the playoffs as an observer, not a participant.

At this point I'm willing to back off of the "fire Murray" rampage I have been on. Today's deals send mixed messages as to what the plan really is, but today showed good progress towards future improvement. I think it is time to cut Murray a break and let him work the program, and next fall we will see where we really are.
--
[1] BOB-FM's morning man liked to describe Martin Brodeur as the world's greatest goalie, complete with reverb effects. I like that description.