January 2009 Archives

The Leafs are now comfortably ensconced in the the NHL's Baltic Avenue neighbourhood, last night's trip through Memory Five Hole notwithstanding. And Leafs fans and mittenstringers are for once pretty much in agreement. The best possible outcome of this season is to get a high draft pick. And not just any pick. The discussion on TMLfans's ongoing 'Waiting For Tavares' thread, for example, pretty much sums up the same two ideal outcomes you see everywhere.

Get the #1 pick, draft Tavares.

or

Get the #2 pick, hope the Isles take Hedman, draft Tavares.

But is the number one or two spot all it's cracked up to be? Three months spent counting down to the lottery has got me wondering - how often is the eventual best player in the draft selected in one of the first two slots?

Let's take a look at 20 years of drafts, from 1981-2000, AND SOLVE THE MYSTERY TOGETHER....

1981

1 - Dale Hawerchuk 2 - Doug Smith
Best player: see below.

Obviously, Dale Hawerchuk was a pretty damn fine player, but no way is he the best player in this draft. That would be one of Ron Francis (#4 overall), Al McInnis (15), or Chris Chelios (40), depending on your taste. I'd go with Francis, myself. And has anyone ever noticed how much Chelios looks like Tony Bourdain?


















































1982

1-Gord Kluzak 2-Brian Bellows
Best player - Scott Stevens (fifth overall)

"WAY TO LAY ON THE ICE LIKE A BROAD, BELLOWS!" Sorry. The guy just missed 500 career goals and that's all I can think of when I see his name. Kluzak's promising career was sunk by knee injuries. Scott Stevens' hits probably ended more careers than booze and sleeping with the coaches wife combined. Damn, he was scary.

1983

1-Brian Lawton 2- Sylvain Turgeon
Best player: Steve Yzerman (4)

Yeah, that's an ugly top two right there. If we are doing SAT analogies, Sylvain Turgeon was to the Adams Division what Bruce Chen was to the AL East. I think he missed playing for Boston, though. Also spearheaded the 'wearing a really high number that's not double digits' trend. As a result, he is the second best #61 ever.

We're 0 for 3 so far.

1984

1-Mario Lemieux 2- Kirk Muller
Best Player - Take a guess, Einstein

Well, that breaks the duck in style. The only other player in Mario's zip code in this draft was Patrick Roy at 51. Of course, goalies are hardly ever taken in the top two, and I doubt one goes in the top ten this year.

1985

1-Wendel Clark, 2-Craig Simpson
Best player - Wendel Clark

I know, I know, but go take a look yourself and tell me who was better than Wendel. Mike Richter? He was a nice goalie and all, but I'm not taking Richter over Wendel Clark. I'm just not. And sure, Igor Larionov was picked in the last round, but I really don't think that counts, considering everyone already knew he was one of the top 5 players in the world and they were just waiting for the Cold War to end.

1986

1- Joe Murphy 2- Jimmy Carson
Best player - Brian Leetch (9)

God, I don't think you could pick two guys who inspired more 'Is this the year Lazyass McBooedalot finally breaks out?' Articles. They both produced too much to be ever called busts, but they always left you wanting more. If either was your best player, you'd be missing the playoffs. Didn't both of them end up playing Tier II during a dispute with the team at one point? Or was that just Carson?

Watching Brian Leetch's all too brief stint in a Leafs uniform made me realize I had never appreciated what a phenomenal player he was. So smart, so smooth, such a passer and point man - he was the rich man's Tomas Kaberle.

1987

1- Pierre Turgeon 2-  Brendan Shanahan
Best player - Joe Sakic (15)

Not bad, even if Turgeon made Craig Janney seem hard-nosed. Sakic walks it, obviously.

And BTW, clicking on the player's name from here on in gets you footage of their selection. Nothing quite as good as this, but a lot of them are well worth a look.

1988

1- Mike Modano 2- Trevor Linden
Best player - Mike Modano

This was close. Modano and Rod Brind' Amour are actually closer than you'd think. And if Rod hadn't been stuck on the second line for most of his peak he may have made up the difference. And he's got the Conn Smythe. Modano's star turn in the Mr Perfect vignettes (around 0:20 in there) just pushed him over the top here.
3 for 8 so far.

1989

1- The Consultant 2 - Dave Chyzowski (ahh, the Islanders)
Best player - Nik Lidstrom (53)

This was a pretty damn good draft year, which must be all the more galling for Isles fans. The Wings also picked up Fedorov and Konstantinov in this draft, which hardly seems fair. Hey Burke! Do that!

1990

1- Owen Nolan 2- Petr Nedved
Best player - Jaromir Jagr (5) or Marty Brodeur (20)

Petr Nedved should have 'enigmatic' attached to his name, it was used so often about him. Remember the year he was a free agent and ended up playing for Team Canada? That was awesome. We lost anyways.

I would take Jagr over Brodeur.

1991

1- Eric Lindros 2- Pat Falloon
Best player - Scott Niedermayer (3)

Courtnall for Kordic gets all the play, but Kurvers for Niedermayer was a million times worse. One's a useful second liner, one's among the top 5 defencemen of the last 20 years. Lindros, of course was traded immediately for a lower selection who had a better career, plus half a contending team. He later played for Toronto, one of the many guys brought in by JFJ (Marchment!) that rooting for made you feel queasy. Christ, what a shitshow.

1992

1- Roman Hamrlik 2- Yashin
Best player: well...

This was not a good year. On peak I guess you'd have to go with Yashin, but if some guys are locker room cancers, he was locker room Ebola. Plus, he was the worst playoff performer I can ever remember seeing. God, I wish there was a Youtube compilation of Alexei Yashin playoff highlights. I'd watch that shit almost as much all "All Heart." Every time I felt a little down on myself, I could fire up his greatest giveaways, getting crunched, goals being scored by a guy he missed, clips of Jacques Martin saying "Alexei will turn it around." Someone needs to make this. So, yeah, I'm going to have to go with Sergei Gonchar (14) here.

1993

1 - Alexandre Daigle 2- Chris Pronger

Pronger in a landslide. Kariya's the only other guy you could even make a case for.

Oh, and

1-Alexandre Daigle

in case you missed it.

Highlight of the Daigle draft clip lined above - McKenzie saying that Daigle has 'the fire in his eyes like Rocket Richard.'

1994

1- Ed Jovanovski  (Radek Bonk's mullet in this clip is tremendous) 2- Oleg Tverdovsky

Best player: Unfortunately, as hard as it is for me to say.... Wait, let me start over. While he may not be a favourite of Leafs fans, this guy has put up--- OK, I'll get it this time. Even though he has captained a hated rival, boarded Tucker, looks like a Muppet, guaranteed a Cup one year, no one can deny--- Oh, fuck it.

Sergei Berezin was the best player taken in 1994.

1995

1-Bryan Berard 2-Wade Redden
Best player: Jarome Iginla (11)

I truly belive Berard would have been great if not for the eye injury. He was phenomenal in his brief time in Toronto. Did you know he's in the KHL now? I didn't. Future Leafs Aki Berg and Chad Kilger were taken 3-4. A few years ago, the Leafs had quite the habit of picking up top choices that had disappointed for one reason or another. By 2005-06 it was freaking "Brylcreem's Island of Misfit Picks".

1996

1- Chris Phillips 2- Andrei Zyuzin

Best player: This draft was weaker than Glass Joe. The best player is either Daniel Briere or late pick Tomas Kaberle. So far, you'd have to give it to #15.

1997

1- Joe Thornton 2- Patrick Marleau

Best player: Thornton

6 for 17 so far.

1998

1- Vincent Lecavalier 2- David Legwand

Best player: Lecavalier, though Datsyuk may have an argument soon. Why did the Leafs work out a trade for Vinny during what was apparently the only two day period in Lightning history that ownership wasn't insane or high? What were the odds of that?

1999-

1- Patrik Stefan 2-The Swedish Cycling team

This draft is even worse than 1996. I guess I'd hold my nose and pick Daniel Sedin, but this one shouldn't even count. I've seen deeper expansion drafts than this. Marty Havlat, Niclas Havelid are the only other contenders. This draft stinks like a dirty diaper filled with Indian food.

2000-

1) Rick DiPietro 2) Dany Heatley

It's Heatley. Also, the DiPietro pick and Luongo trade was really just Milbury at his best, wasn't it? Some may say the Chara deal, some may favour one his other 35 asinine moves. To me, nothing sums up the Milbury Magic like drafting a franchise goalie, then drafting another one and trading the first one for pennies on the dollar cause 'you had to have this one!' Can you imagine what Mike Milbury's garage looks like? His fridge?

Highlight of the above clip: Kumar saying "The Islanders are going to do something a little different" and then the shot of Milbury. I imagine Dick Ripietro lost his Zoodles right there.

So what have we learned?

9 times in 20 years, the best player in the draft goes in one of the top two slots. So that's a 45% chance, which is good, but when the Leafs end up picking later, it's not
the end of the world. In those twenty years the Leafs player who reached the highest level of performance, the man we honour Saturday night, was picked 134th overall.

It was Wayne Gretzky's birthday on Monday. I know, I didn't get him anything either. I'm sure he got something great from Kerry Fraser, though. Anyways, I heard Ray Ferraro being interviewed about Wayner. When asked about playing against him, he was quick to stress that the Great One had the 'intangibles', the will to win and be his best that was as important to his success as his awareness, passing, and vision. In fact Ferraro contended that intangibles were what separated Gretzky from other talented players who didn't achieve their full potential.

Like Mario Lemieux.

Yeah, that guy. Three Harts, two Conn Smythes, six Art Ross, 199 points in a year, 2002 gold, 1723 career points. Mario DONKEYBLANKING LEMIEUX.

All baseball fans are familiar with the Scrappiness Fallacy. Fans and reporters love the Johnny McGlovins and Willie Bloomquists of the world because they hustle, have grit, are gamers, all the synonyms for 'undersized white guy I like who's not really talented enough to start'. Hell, paeans to scrappiness must have provided the late Fire Joe Morgan with about 65% of its content.

Hockey fans also love their grinders. Hell, I used to own a Bill Berg jersey and wish I still had it. But the scrappiness fallacy isn't as pronounced in hockey, because hockey is a contact sport with specialized roles. If you're bringing hustle, intensity, and smart play without putting numbers on the board in hockey, you are Kirk Maltby. You're an important complementary player on a championship team. If you're doing the same in baseball, you're Joe McEwing, and you shouldn't be in the lineup.

Nevertheless, sportswriters love to write about all these intangibles, no matter what the sport, perhaps because they are more easily understood, or perhaps cause it's easier to talk out your ass when discussing something that is by its very nature indefinable. When trying to discuss the incandescent peak of Wayne Gretzky, you can break down how great he was with statistics, you can speak of passing lanes, wing play, and the how the Oilers set up their power play or forecheck, or you can spout some cliches about "wanting it more." Which one gets you down to the bar before deadline?

So the discourse of intangibles, attaches itself to hockey's superstars. Gretzky,  being small and English Canadian, represents humility and hard work, even if he did have untouchable skills. Mario, on the other hand, is 6''4. Obviously, he didn't have to work as hard, or care as much. Even though he put up a staggering amount of points, captained the Pens to two Cups, and led the league in scoring the same season he took time off to undergo chemotherapy.

It reminds me of how Yzerman and Modano transitioned from one-dimensional scorers to 'complete' players who now worked hard in all three zones and led their teams. This transformation occurred right around the time their teams started contending for the Cup.

Leafs fans, take Doug Gilmour and Mats Sundin. Sure, Gilmour's peak was higher, but no one has scored as many goals for the Leafs as the Big Dither. But Dougie was small and scrappy, so while he didn't play in Toronto nearly as long, never took the team any further than Mats did, and whined his way out of town when the team hit tough times, he was and is far more beloved by Leaf fans. But as Mats and Mario demonstrate, being great and being loved can be two different things.

And it's not just Toronto. One month into his Canucks career, Mats is being ripped regularly in Vancouver for not having enough fire, or showing enough emotion. Fuck, if the Canucks really wanted that they could have promoted any number of AHLers. Unlike in Toronto, though, where such criticisms were usually without merit, Mats hasn't helped his case at all by taking tons of team killing penalties, looking sluggish, and worst of all, not scoring. He's also taking much flak for going to Whistler over the break instead of staying in town to work out. Because doing drills in an empty rink is gonna be huge for a guy whose biggest problem is readapting to the speed of the NHL game.

So far, an apt nickname for Mats would be... well, comes over at the end of his career from another organization, big rep, makes a lot of money, is basically invisible, doesn't seem that motivated - Mats "The Consultant" Sundin!

And if you'll forgive this long meandering coda (that kind of mirrors Mats in Vancouver), the Canucks freefall that has been happening simultaneously has provided a perfect storm of nonsense here in Vancouver. The highlight was undoubtedly yesterday, when a caller interrupted Dave Pratt's ripping of Sundin by suggesting that maybe Mats knows how to handle his training and that it was a bit rich that Mats' work ethic was being questioned by a guy who worked four hours a day, four or five days a week. Cue Pratt blowing a headpipe and cutting a self-righteous promo about how no one in the business outworked him, he sweated blood for the show, etc. Remember, this is the same guy who got canned by the Province for plagiarizing a column cause "he wanted to get out of the office before noon on a Saturday." Maybe he's scrappy.



 

People can come up with statistics to prove anything, Kent. Fourteen percent of people know that."
-Homer Simpson

The great debate over fighting hockey continues to rage like a tire fire, and now, thanks to a recently released Harris Decima poll, we have some numbers to work with rather than just the opinions of those on both sides of this tilt. I've seen some very valid arguments from both sides over the past few weeks, ranging from Bob McCown's zero-tolerance campaign on Fan 590 to Down Goes Brown's visceral defence of puck-pugilism from a few days back. Mr. Brown also managed to draw Damien Cox into a debate yesterday, after another shocking appearance by Cox in the comments section of his own blog! You can read up on the details here.

Speaking of Mr. Cox, he has been one of the louder opponents of fighting in the NHL, and to his credit he has been making his case for years now and should not be accused, as has been suggested in some circles, of using Don Sanderson's tragic death to boost his case. As Cox rightly points out in The Spin yesterday:

In life and society, it's usually a drastic event that draws people's attention to a problem, and in this case, Sanderson's death surely put to rest for good the old saw that nobody ever gets hurt in a hockey fight.

However, Cox quickly jumped on the Harris Decima poll yesterday in a blog post full of crowing told-you-so's and cowering qualifiers. For example:

For years now, I've argued that a silent majority of Canadians would prefer to take fighting out of hockey.

We're reeling from the news today that the Unblinking Watchdog of Canadian Sports Media, William Houston, will be leaving his position at the Globe and Mail effective February 1. Glove tap to friend of the site Howard Berger for breaking the story:

HOUSTON, WE HAVE A BUY-OUT: Long-time readers of the Globe & Mail might be disappointed to learn that veteran reporter/columnist William Houston will leave the paper, effective Feb. 1. Houston's popular column - Truth & Rumours - has been a staple for more than 15 years, critiquing electronic media across Canada; particularly in the Toronto market. Bill's opinions often angered his subjects [I've been on the wrong end of one or two of them], but they were usually honest and fair.

One of Houston's colleagues once gave us shit for what he thought was an off-colour remark about Houston, but honestly we have nothing but respect for him. As Berger points out, Houston was always honest and fair, a total class act all the way, which must have been difficult considering his beat. We've only been doing this for less than two years, and it gets difficult after a while to keep criticizing the same people for the same shit over and over again without resorting to cheap gags and lame nicknames. Houston did it for 15 years and he kept it interesting, objective, and readable.

Houston was also a Leafs beat writer during the franchise's darkest hours. Harold Ballard hated him, so he was obviously doing something right his entire career.

His columns blended media criticism, some solid reporting, and a bit of Canadian cultural esoterica. For example, where the hell are we going to get our CFL ratings breakdowns now?

For someone who loves the idiosyncracies (dare I say - foibles?) of the Canadian cultural landscape, there was a weird joy in reading something like this:

Calgary-Saskatchewan: 225,000

Reduced long weekend audience for TSN's Friday night game.

Happy trails, Bill. You'll be missed, by your two obnoxious, profane grandchildren anyway.

Kim and Godd

We here at Cox Bloc get so wrapped up in the excitement of the Toronto Sports Writing scene that we often forget about those reporters and columnists that somehow exist outside the centre of the universe. Lest we get tarred with that common smear about being smug, self-satisfied pricks who don't know about anything happening outside of the 416, we've decided to mount up and venture into the cold, barren wasteland that constitutes the rest of the hockey world and see what  the provincial Mittenstringers are saying.

First up we have the Kingston Whig Standard's Jan Murphy.  I have nothing but respect for Mr. Murphy's anger, belligerence, and insistence on addressing a terrible injustice:

For whatever asinine reason, the Leafs have four Saturday nights off over the course of this season. I'm not 100% certain, but I'd go out on a limb to bet this is the first time such a travesty has occurred.

During a brief discussion with Whig sports editor Mike Koreen, I mentioned this abomination and he down-played it like it wasn't a big deal. The Leafs, he said, are rebuilding, they are not drawing TV audiences like they used to and the CBC and the league are looking elsewhere.
 
Thanks for the explanation. Maybe there is even some truth to that.
But guess what? I don't care.
 
There is no excuse for this, as far as I am concerned.
 

Damn right. If Till or I had bothered to address Hockey Night in Canada's stubborn refusal to show the Leafs every Saturday night this season, we would have dug around on the internet for ratings numbers and tried to prove that it is bad business to show anyone but the Leafs on Saturday night. Instead, Mr. Murphy follows U.S. Associate Justice Potter Stewart's maxim about porno ("I know it when I see it") and just calls bullshit. Respect.

A little further up the road, the usually spot-on Jack Todd of the Montreal Gazette threw his hat in the ring for the previously unheard of "Best Working Class Howard Impersonation" contest

Then we have the mighty Maple Leafs. Some day, someone will write a really interesting book about the psychology of Leafs fans and some of their media cheerleaders, who strut and bluster despite decades of failure.

The Canadiens have won 10 Stanley Cups since the last time the Leafs held a parade that mattered, and yet every time you mention the team, Maple Leafs fans go ballistic and start shrieking about how the Habs haven't won since '93. I don't know, maybe they can't afford calendars, so they don't understand how far back 1967 really is.

Mysterious media cheerleaders? Check. Wildly inaccurate generalizations about Leafs fans? Check. Entirely made-up encounters with those same fans? Check. Someone has cracked Howie's code.

The saving grace of Todd's column is this little anecdote about Mikhail Grabovski:

When Grabovski was left out of the lineup for the Canadiens' 2007-08 home opener, he appeared in a suit for the opening ceremonies, then vanished from the building: several fans reported seeing him with his girlfriend at a downtown sports restaurant in Montreal, where Grabovski spent most of the evening chatting on his cell phone, ignoring both the girlfriend and the game his teammates were playing.

We'll file this one under 'yeah, he's a bit of a dick, but he's our dick'.

Something called MLive in Michigan recently rekindled a debate that only appeals to a certain type of hockey-loving footy fanatic:

Maple Leafs fans would argue that they're the "Manchester United" of hockey, but Red Wings fans have fewer conditions (not using the word that describes a vacuum's operations) and offer a real and honest chance to see games.

Well, Manchester United wins a lot of trophies, so I don't think you'll see many Leafs fans making this comparison. Sure, the Leafs are well-supported and have a history of success (emphasis on history), but any comparison with United ends around 1988. I don't know what the fuck this dude means by fewer conditions, but the Red Wings are about as close as it gets to United in the NHL. They haven't reached quite the same success, but the Red Wings have been consistently at or near the top of the NHL for 15 years. The Devils are close, but they don't have Detroit's ability to fill up the bandwagon - a major concern when trying to find a Man U comp.

Other comparisons are easier to make: Liverpool's NHL equivalent is clearly the Montreal Canadiens. There's the same owner, the red uniforms, the unmatched history of success , era-defining rioting,  and a recent resurgence after a decade in the wilderness. On the other hand, Liverpool won the Champions League a few years back, while all Leafs fans know that the Habs HAVEN'T WON SQUAT SINCE 1993!!! YOU HEARD THAT RIGHT!!! 15 YEARS!!!! I'VE GONE BALLISTIC!!!!!!!

Unfortunately, the easiest comparison is between the Toronto Maple Leafs and Newcastle United. Both teams are well-supported with a proud history and a sad-familiarity with batshit crazy owners (Freddy Shepherd manages to pull off the amazing double of having strong similarities to both Harold Ballard and Richard Peddie). Most importantly, neither team has won jack-shit since the late 1960's.

One major difference between Newcastle United and the Maple Leafs would be that Newcastle fans are generally pitied but respected, while Leafs fans are universally loathed. Yep, from Montreal to Michigan to Calgary, Leafs fans are the butt of easy jokes. Like this one from the Calgary Herald: 

- Derek Wilken of Calgary, on a poll being conducted to find the greatest natural wonders of the world: "Canada's entries include Niagara Falls, Alberta's Dinosaur Park and the faith of Toronto Maple Leafs fans.''

I'm sure it is supposed to be an insult, but the way I see it: Leafs Nation = Wonder of the World. Cheers Derek.

We often make fun of Damien Cox around here for his habit of contradicting himself, sometimes within a week, and on the odd occasion within a day. Well, unbelievably, we managed to find a guy who can complete the Cox-cycle in one single column. Ladies and gentlemen, I present to you...well...his name doesn't appear on the column...which is strange...so I present to you: some Mittenstringer from the Standard Freeholder in Cornwall:

I have much respect for a guy who, if you believe the rumours and innuendo, left a lot of cash on the NHL table, left his pro hockey career behind, to come back to his hometown to be with his family and raise his children.
 
I get that. So do others. Like one of Chad Kilger's neighbours I bumped into yesterday, who was out walking his dog in the brilliant icy sunshine. We agreed that Kilger had had a fairly long and lucrative NHL career, had every right to walk away from it to be strictly a family guy.
 
We agreed that Kilger is/was under no obligation to explain himself publicly, explain his sudden departure from the NHL 10 months ago, if he chooses not to.
 
That's small-town Canada for you. Guy wants to be left alone? Leave him alone. Unlike that big-city, fast-talkin', suit-wearin', original Mittenstringer-of-the-Year-winnin' Steve Simmons of the Toronto Sun. You see, a few weeks back Simmons wondered "Hey, whatever happened to Chad Kilger?" and dredged up the old masseuse rumour that followed Kilger out of town last year.
 
Apparently Kilger was a bit pissed about Simmons's column, and that anger extended to the Standard Freeholder which runs Simmons' syndicated Sunday Brainsqueeze. Of course, we all agree that Kilger is under no obligation to explain himself publicly. Which explains why the unnamed columnist from the Standard Freeholder turned up on Kilger's doorstep to get some answers and had the door slammed in his face by the hockey world's version of Desiree Cousteau.

Kilger is angry, very angry, apparently, that the local paper ran the Simmons column.

I feel this way about most Simmons columns, and none of them, to my knowledge, have contained allegations about me cheating on my wife. Well, anyway, Kilger is under no obligation to explain himself, so let's close the door on this one, eh guys.

And it's misguided anger. Should there be anger directed at Simmons? Mmm . . . it's a stretch.

Anger at how the whole situation has been handled? That's better. The ramifications of silence can be deafening.
 
Anger directed at the local daily? For running a column that appeared in the major papers in one of the largest media chains in North America? Anger at the Standard-Freeholder, a part of the Sun Media company, for making the easy and obvious decision to run a column that had been read by many people in Cornwall and area when it had appeared in the Ottawa Sun?
 
Wait...the easy and obvious decision for the Standard-Freeholder is to run content that people have already read in other publications? Like Reader's Digest? Or a David Pratt column?

Anyway, Chad wants to be left alone, and luckily for him, the local unnamed scribes are willing to grant his wish. Except when they, you know, come knocking on his door looking for answers. And, if Kilger decides he doesn't want to talk, well we all agree that Kilger is/was under no obligation to explain himself publicly, explain his sudden departure from the NHL 10 months ago, if he chooses not to.
 
Right? Unknown soldier of truth?

Me, and the Standard-Freeholder, and all of you readers not in the Kilger inner circle who aren't privy to anything but all of the rumours that are out there, got a terse sentence and a shutting door.
Thanks a lot, Chad.

Woah. From "he doesn't need to explain anything" to "fuck you buddy" in just over 500 words. Top that one Damien.

And, just because I can't link to things in the title, here is some dude dancing to Husker Du.

I don't disagree with mild-mannered Globe reporter by day/hockey blogging Superman by night James Mirtle all too often. His site is a welcome oasis of solid reporting and sober analysis. So I was surprised to see his recent post approvingly linking to Mike Milbury (of all people) and echoing Mad Mike's call for Don Cherry to enter the Hockey Hall of Fame in the builders category. Cherry's about as qualified for that as Bronson Pinchot is for a Lifetime Achievement Oscar.



First, a few caveats. While I find Grape's shtick painful and tiresome, I would have no problem with him being honoured in the media wing (note to self - taking a look at who else is in that wing is something I need to revisit). And second, it's probably too late to call for only the best to be honoured by an institution that has inducted Bernie Federko and Clark Gillies as players and HAROLD BALLARD as a builder.

Still, the push for Cherry's induction (also referenced today at Puck Daddy) is the opportunity to assess Cherry's legacy. While some of the commenters touched on some of the specifics of Don's case, I think a lot of the major points remain unaddressed.

And a cursory look at Cherry's record demonstrates that that honouring someone who has unfailingly been on the wrong side of just about every one of his pet hockey issues is ridiculous.

Let's take a look at three major areas.

Fighting: This is a tough one for me. As I was saying to Kim last night, while I hate the culture of fighting in hockey and think it's pretty absurd that North American hockey is the only sport that allows the game to stop while dudes pound each other upside the head, I genuinely enjoy watching a good hockey fight, and prefer cheering a team that can fight to one that can't.  (Can you imagine if other sports employed goons? If Man United had some big lumbering centre back whose only purpose was to foul guys and occasionally jersey Stevie Gerrard and pummel him? Or if baseball teams had a 6'5, 250 lb relievers whose job was to come into blowouts, bean a guy and kick the crap out of him? And if managers responded by sending up their 6'6. 280 lb pinch hitter to charge the mound?)

Thankfully, this isn't about what I think. Despite Cherry's impassioned soliloquies to the art of throwing knuckles, rule changes at every level over the past 30 years have all been in the direction of reducing or removing fighting.

As a coach, Cherry's promotion of "Come to the Rockies fights and watch a hockey game break out' was the last sad blast of the Slap Shot NHL of the 1970s. Embarrassing.

Equipment: Wrong again.  Cherry has always questioned the manliness and sexuality of guys who wear visors, even though full shields are SOP in junior hockey. As a Maple Leafs fan who saw the promising career of Bryan Berard cut down by a preventable injury, this one really frosts me.

Europeans: The big one. No development in the last 30 years has improved the quality of NHL hockey more than the arrival of top European players in the NHL. Lidstrom, Ovechkin, Mogilny, Bure, Kurri, Sundin, Forsberg, Hasek, Tlusty,,,, the list of Europeans who have lit up the imaginations of hockey fans is a long and illustrious one.

At every step of the way, Cherry has called Europeans soft, spineless, dirty, poor leaders, unable to step it up in the clutch or the trenches of the Stanley Cup playoffs, bad in the dressing room, selfish, you name it. Many European players made sacrifices and faced a tough road on and off the ice to follow their NHL dream. And every step of the way, Cherry tried to make it tougher.

I suppose Cherry deserves some credit for putting his outdated theories of hockey to the test. If you remember, he bought the Mississauga Ice Dogs and refused to stock the team with any European players. In the Dogs first three seasons, they racked up sixteen wins. Total.

Interestingly, when Cherry decided to coach the team himself, he reneged on his no-Europeans policy. The team won eleven games.

At just about every turn, Don Cherry has been wrong about the direction of the game, preferring outdated shibboleths to innovation and progress. How can you honour a builder who would, given his choice not build the game but tear it down and return it to the Eddie Shore era? Cherry's done about as much to build good hockey as his buddy Mike Milbury did to build a dynasty on Long Island.

Would baseball honour a commentator who was best known for opposing batting helmets, supporting beanballs and benchclearing brawls, and baiting Hispanic players at every opportunity?

Don Cherry has made a very, very, good living out of the game (and Canadian taxpayers). That's more than he deserves. Enough already.

Many of you will be familiar with Dick RiPietro from either his trolling in the comments section or his excellent contribution to our review of Chinese Democracy. With the future of the Leafs and Isles becoming more and more entwined as the two teams vie for the right to draft John Tavares, we thought it would interest our readers to know what goes on, if anything, inside the mind of an Islanders fan. We tracked Dick down in the natural habitat of the Islanders supporter (rooting through the garbage behind the bingo hall for smokeable cigarette butts) and asked him a few questions.

But first, it is time to for me to stick my thumbs in my belt loops Strombo style and give you the bio. Dick is a former member of the North Bay Centennials front office and now works on some top-secret government stuff that he could tell us about, but then would have to kill us. Seriously. Sometimes he starts telling us about it just so that he has an excuse to kill us.

Dick is not only an expert when it comes to terrible NHL clubs; he also possesses an insane knowledge of pro-wrestling and heavy metal. Dick has paid actual dollars to see the following bands in concert: Dangerous Toys, Firehouse, Metal Church, Sepultura, Danzig, Sacred Reich, Suicidal Tendencies, Iron Maiden, Guns'n'Roses, Warrant, Ugly Kid Joe, Trixter, Slaughter, Pantera, Queensryche, Testament, Judas Priest, Motley Crue, White Lion, Vixen, and many many others.

Now that we're all friends, on with the inquisition:

Why are you an Islanders fan? Fetal alcohol syndrome? You're a masochist? What gives?

I started watching hockey around 1980. I'll admit it I jumped on the bandwagon. I just haven't had the brains to jump off.

Are the Islanders tanking, or are they really this bad? 

Well, I am going to toe the company line here and say that injuries have really played a part in our bad season. It really has nothing to do with the fact that we are a team of over the hill has-beens and youngsters who have yet to do anything. It is all because of injuries.

How are the Isles going to fuck up the number one pick in June? 

I am pretty sure that we will finish dead last and then lose the stupid lottery draw and not get first anyway.

Assuming that the Isles finish last and win the lottery, who do you want them to draft?

Obviously the pick would be Tavares but I don't think Hedman is the worst idea.  I like the idea of a big guy who isn't going to break and be a waste of a pick ala Brett Lindros.

Josh Bailey has been looking good as of late? Which over-paid and over-the-hill vet do you expect him to be traded for this summer?

 I think it will be Bailey for McCabe.  The Isles are notorious for getting players back that are past their prime and would have been useful 5 years earlier. See Bryan Berard.

Mike Milbury traded away Roberto Luongo, Jason Spezza, Bryan McCabe, Zdeno Chara, Todd Bertuzzi, Olli Jokinen, Eric Brewer, and many others during his tenure as Isles GM. Which one of those players would you most like to have back? 

I think Chara is the one I miss the most.  That is guy is money.  I watched the Bruins-Isles game last night and remembered how awesome he is.

What is your favourite memory as an Isles fan?

Easily the conference final run in the 92-93 playoffs.  The cups are good but I was still a little young to really appreciate it.  The Dave Volek goal and Kasparaitis making Mario his bitch were especially exciting.  (I still hate Dale Hunter)

Who is the Islanders equivalent of Wendel Clark?

I would have to say Gillies.  He had the same style of play and is still beloved on The Island.

How about the equivalent of Aki Berg or Larry Murphy?

Berg - I would say maybe Scott LaChance fit that role.  He certainly wasn't spectacular and underachieved every step of the way.

Murphy - If you mean someone who played for the Peterborough Petes, I think only Steve Webb and Joey McDonald fit.

Should Clark Gillies be in the Hall of Fame?

His stats aren't great, but they aren't bad either.  He had over 30 goals 4 years in a row and had tons of fights as well.  He was also on the line with Bossy and Trots and look how great those two did.

Your grasp of cause and effect seems a bit lacking. Anyway, Vladimir Kozlov - yea or nay? 

I am going with a nay.  It may as well be Snitsky up there.  If I want to see a big Russian give me Nikita Koloff any day of the week

Which Ranger do you hate the most?

There are so many, but off the top of my head I think Domi.  Mostly because he gets all the props for being so tough but when Mick Vukota kicked his ass, no one said shit about it.

What are your thoughts on the Leafs? 

Alright, here is my honest opinion on the leafs, of course not taking into consideration the shit I give you guys...I actually used to like them in the 80's...The hound line, Frycer, Salming, Courtnall, Palmateer, etc.  The problem is that when you grow up in Leaf Nation and they are not your favourite team, it is impossible to get info on anything else.  Luckily there is Internet and Center Ice and stuff now, but I am already soured.  I hate seeing all these people who don't give a damn about them until they do something good and then everyone and their brother is sporting their leaf jersey and painting their face blue and white.  I am sure it is the same in every town but since this is where I am, then this what I have to put up with.  Other than that, as long as we are not in contention for a playoff spot then I don't really give a shit one way or another.

Are you finally willing to admit that Tucker's hit on Peca was clean?

I could never admit that it was clean. My mother taught me not to lie.

If the Isles were an 80's hair-metal band, what band would they be?

As much as I hate to admit it, I would say they are probably Warrant.  They started off strong and were a big deal for a few years, but soon fell from grace.  They keep trying to make a comeback but no one is interested.

Is Hellacious Acres the best Dangerous Toys record?

That is an excellent question.  That one and the self-titled are nearly perfect in every way.  I think it might just get the nod over the self-titled one though since it has the better cover art.

What is the better Quiet Riot song - Metal Health or Cum On Feel Tha Noize?

 Easily Metal Health, out of the two, but Sign Of The Times might be the best song ever written.

You're ordering breakfast at the Aviemore. Bacon, ham, or sausage?

Bacon every time.

Genesis or SNES?

 I am all about Nintendo in every other instance but this one.  NHL for Genesis was like crack.  Especially the year that you could do "the move" and score every time.

I assume you mean 'Fake to the backhand, shift to forehand and roof it?' I won Paul Dipietro the Hart and Art Ross with that move. One final question - you can go out on the piss with a) one original member of GNR b) one pro wrestler, and c) one NHLer. Who do you choose, and why?
 
I am assuming that you mean I get to choose one of each.

a) Duff.  We both like the metal and the punk and we both play bass with a pick (which is looked down on by "real" bass players.)  Preferably before he got sober, but I bet he is still a riot.
 
b)Barry Darsow.  The most underrated wrestler of all time.  Whether it be Demolition Smash, Krusher Krustchev, Repo-Man (my personal favourite) or even Hole In One Darsow, I have always been a fan of his work.  I would love to hear some stories from the early days teaming with the Koloffs.
 
c) One NHLer...that one is tough.  I would probably say Link Gaetz.  I bet that guy drinks like a fish and is probably up for some rowdy behaviour when out on the town.  Wouldn't really have to worry about getting in a fight as I am sure he could pretty much beat anyone's ass.

Thanks for your time Dick. Potvin sucks.

Do you have a question for Dick? We'll be taking reader questions for the next edition of "Ask an Isles Fan". Leave your question in the comments, or email it to coxbloc@gmail.com, Remember, we're dealing with an Islanders fan here, so try to use as few multi-syllable words as possible.

*Note: Use of Comic Sans is intentional.

Sometimes I believe in God. From Damien's latest mailbag:

Q: If the NHL wants more scoring why have offsides? Wouldn't eliminating offsides increase scoring? See N.L.L. for an example of a league with no offsides and lots of scoring.
- Phil McKrackin, Toronto

A: Well, the NHL doesn't really seem to want more scoring. Moreover, I don't think anybody wants to see a game where players could just loiter in the offensive zone while the play is going on in their own end. That would just fundamentally alter the game.

I wonder if Damien is going to gut Phil like a fish and drink his blood if he ever finds him?

The 2008 Mittenstringer of the Year Awards and Meat Draw took place on Sunday night. This unprecedented failtacular was perfectly pitched to the standards of those being honoured. It took place in the worst place on earth, Oshawa, and featured the comedy hosting stylings of Mike Bullard. Musical entertainment was provided by Slik Toxik and Snow, and guests feasted on KFC Famous Bowls and Thrills Gum. While negotiations for a premiere broadcast on CHEX-TV fell through at the last minute, we are happy to provide transcripts of the winners' acceptance speeches. To really put you in the mood, this clip captures the vibe of the evening perfectly.

And now, our winners!

Second runner-up, DON CHERRY:

"Well you know Ron, it's good to be back here where Bobby Orr took a crap once. Chicken wings, Dougie Gilmour, play the pass on the two on one, Ron Wilson is nuttier than squirrel shit... KIDS DON'T SHARE WATER BOTTLES, one time me and Terry O'Reilly ate a bears heart... smeared its blood....so many good men dead..what's the deal with herring? How do they get those big fish into those little glass jars? I shouldn't eat that Swede shit...fight all the time, Kirk Muller, good night. 

First-runner up, HOWARD BERGER:

"I know I shouldn't be upset about this, not when children are dying in cancer wards all over the place. I know that I should be grateful that you sheep enable my playboy lifestyle of limo rides, Cowboys tickets, and midseason California holidays.... but WHAT THE HELL PEOPLE??? What do I have to do? I insult the fanbase all year, I ghostwrite a YEAR'S worth of reasonable columns for Steve Simmons, I get a goddam open letter from the entire Barilkosphere, and that's not enough? Well, I am IN IT TO WIN IT for 2009, so let me get started right now: What's the difference between NAMBLA members and Leafs fans?

Even the ACLU won't defend Leafs fans! HEY-O! But they both soil their jeans over kids who are barely shaving - you in the Schenn jersey, you know what I'm talking about!

(wrap it up music begins loudly playing)

"Wendel Clark wears a fake stache!" (Berger is dragged offstage)

WINNER, AND 2008 MITTENSTRINGER OF THE YEAR, DAMIEN COX:

"Well, this is a surprise... I'm afraid I didn't even prepare a speech. Seriously though, you idiots naming me in January last year might have tipped me off a bit. But this doesn't faze me. Y'all will spend the next year hating on me in between bites of Scarios at your Mom's crib, while big DC Talk is still gonna be chuckling at foibles, and making the long cheddar. Such is the magnitude of my pimpin.

I think that this may be the last year for me for a while, though. As we all know, there are a lot of truly bad sportswriters in Toronto. Bad writing, no research, lackluster analysis, hell, even outright shitting all over the fanbase doesn't necessarily raise you above the pack. No, it takes a true, unhinged hatred for those running the Leafs to put it over the top. And as I've been fairly positive about Brian Burke, I just don't know where that--

(suddenly "Black Hole Sun" blares through the ballroom)

STEVE SIMMONS: "Good God! That's Al Strachan's music!!!"

To be continued?

Mike Komisarek has yet to receive a vote for 2008 Mittenstringer of the Year, which tells me that the Cox Bloc voting process is much more legitimate than the NHL All Star Game's. Habs fans still have two days to develop some kind of voting bot and make a mockery of this unpopularity contest, as do the rest of you. We'll be taking votes until 6 pm EST on Tuesday. The results will be up later in the week.

You can see the nominees here, and you can vote in the comments below or by email at: coxbloc@gmail.com.