Time keeps on ticking, ticking, ticking, as that old Steve Miller chestnut tells us.  With 30 franchises in the National Hockey League, even if every team were to take a turn winning the Stanley Cup, let’s say in alphabetical order, that would still mean a 30 year wait between Cup victories, and since that type of ultimate parity is never going to happen, then the sober fact is, most NHL fans will never see their team hoist the big mug.

Last season, the Pittsburgh Penguins were the champions, a season after making it to the Stanley Cup Final, and falling short to the Detroit Red Wings.  When captain Sidney Crosby accepted the Cup from NHL Commissioner Gary Bettman, it had been 17 years since the Penguins were crowned Stanley Cup Champions.

17 years is a long time; a generation of Pittsburgh hockey fans would have grown up never having seen Jaromir Jagr and Mario Lemieux play together.  Yet 17 years is nothing if you’re a fan of the Chicago Blackhawks or the Toronto Maple Leafs.

To have experienced a Stanley Cup celebration in Chicago, if you go with the thought that most childhood memories are retained beginning at the age of five, then the youngest you could be as a Blackhawks fans, and vividly recall the Cup being won, is the age of 54.

Chicago has not won the Cup since 1961.  In comparison, Maple Leafs fans aren’t so bad off.  Using that same measurement, the age of the youngest Toronto fan to witness, and remember, a Maple Leafs’ Stanley Cup parade would be 48, as the Leafs haven’t won it all since 1967.

Those are the two longest current Cup droughts in the NHL.  Still, that’s nothing on long-suffering New York Rangers fans.  When the Broadway Blueshirts won it all in 1940, back in the days of a seven-team NHL, if you had suggested that the Rangers would take another 54 years to win it again, you probably would have been laughed at.  No team could be that unfortunate, especially considering the era of the so-called Original Six began shortly after and lasted 25 years.

Yet, as the years wore on, even a losing appearance by the Rangers in the Cup Final was rare.  After falling to the Red Wings in 1950, it was another 22 years before Ranger fans could once again experience the agony of coming up short in the Final, when they lost in six games in 1972 to the Boston Bruins.

The mocking cry of 1940 rang in the ears of Rangers’ fans as the decades piled up.  In one four-year stretch, the rival expansion New York Islanders won more Stanley Cups (4) than the Rangers had won in their entire history.

The 1994 Cup win by the Rangers ended that 54-year drought, but hey, it’s now been 16 years, and counting.

The years can pile up very quickly.

Just ask a fan of the Boston Bruins.  When Bobby Orr flew through the air after putting the puck past Glenn Hall to end the 1970 Stanley Cup Final, putting the Bruins at the top of the hockey world, it had been a long 29 years since Boston had won it all.

Two years later, they repeated the feat.  Two Cups in three years.  The future looked bright.

The Bruins would make it back to the Big Show in 1974, 1977, 1978, 1988 and 1990.

In 1974, they fell to the expansion Philadelphia Flyers.  The powerhouse Montreal Canadiens bested them in 1977 and 1978 (and 1979, for that matter, for that semi-final was the de facto Stanley Cup Final).

Both of the Bruins’ Final appearances in the 80’s ran smack dab into the run-and-gun Edmonton Oilers, the first time with Wayne Gretzky, the second time without.

As we enter the 2010 NHL playoffs, the Boston Bruins have now gone 38 years without winning the Stanley Cup.  Of the Original Six teams, only fans of the Blackhawks and Maple Leafs have been waiting longer.

And for all those smug Montreal Canadiens fans, your team hasn’t won the Cup since 1993, which is 17 years ago.  Yes, there was that non-hockey year of 2004-05, but that applies to every team, which is why we’re calculating years here, not seasons.

That 17-year gap…and counting…is the longest in franchise history, with no indication that it will come to an end any time soon.

The previous dry period for the Habs was during the Dirty Thirties.  Montreal won the 1930-31 Cup, and then didn’t get to taste glory again until 1943-44, a very lengthy 13 years later.

That leaves the Detroit Red Wings as the only Original Six team with a Cup win in recent memory, that being in 2008.  The Red Wings also walked through Valley of the Shadow of Death, going from 1955 until 1997 before winning it all again.  That was a 42 year drought, which only goes to prove the Cup Curse, if there is one, can indeed be broken.

Then again, fans of the Los Angeles Kings, St. Louis Blues, Vancouver Canucks, Buffalo Sabres, and Washington Capitals might say whatever; at least you have a Cup.  All these long-time NHL franchises have made the Stanley Cup Final at least once, but returned home with nothing to show for it.  Which means the Kings and Blues are right behind the Blackhawks and Maple Leafs for longest current Stanley Cup droughts.

What is that cliché?  Just Win Baby?  Not in pro sports.  Count on your team NOT winning the Big One.  Mathematically, it’s a long shot.  Sure, somebody has to win, and the odds are much better than wasting two bucks on a lottery ticket, but it always seems to be the same teams that are either winning the Cup, or at least seriously competing for it.

The following list is ranked in order of NHL team’s that have had the shortest Stanley Cup winning drought.  Obviously, a team such as the Atlanta Thrashers has had a shorter dry spell than the Los Angeles Kings, or the Washington Capitals, due to only being in the league for about a decade.  (** = teams that have yet to win a Stanley Cup)

PITTSBURGH PENGUINS – 3 Stanley Cups (2009, 1992, 1991)

Stanley Cup Final losing appearances – 1 (2008)

DETROIT RED WINGS – 11 Stanley Cups (2008, 2002, 1998, 1997, 1955, 1954, 1952, 1950, 1943, 1937, 1936)

Stanley Cup Final losing appearances – 13 (2009, 1995, 1966, 1964, 1963, 1961, 1956, 1949, 1948, 1945, 1941, 1940, 1934)

Current Cup Drought – 2 years

ANAHEIM DUCKS – 1 Stanley Cup (2007)

Stanley Cup Final losing appearances – 1 (2003)

Current Cup Drought – 3 years

CAROLINA HURRICANES – 1 Stanley Cup (2006)

Stanley Cup Final losing appearances – 1 (2002)

Current Cup Drought – 4 years

TAMPA BAY LIGHTNING – 1 Stanley Cup (2004)

Stanley Cup Final losing appearances – zero

Current Cup Drought – 6 years

NEW JERSEY DEVILS – 3 Stanley Cups (2003, 2000, 1995)

Stanley Cup Final losing appearances – 1 (2001)

Current Cup Drought – 7 years

COLORADO AVALANCHE – 2 Stanley Cups (2001, 1996)

Stanley Cup Final losing appearances – zero

Current Cup Drought – 9 years

**COLUMBUS BLUE JACKETS – zero Stanley Cups

Stanley Cup Final losing appearances – zero

Current Cup Drought – 9 years (since joining the NHL in 2000-01)

**MINNESOTA WILD – zero Stanley Cups

Stanley Cup Final losing appearances – zero

Current Cup Drought – 9 years (since joining the NHL in 2000-01)

**ATLANTA THRASHERS – zero Stanley Cups

Stanley Cup Final losing appearances – zero

Current Cup Drought – 10 years (since joining the NHL in 1999-2000)

**NASHVILLE PREDATORS – zero Stanley Cups

Stanley Cup Final losing appearances – zero

Current Cup Drought – 11 years (since joining the NHL in 1998-99)

DALLAS STARS – 1 Stanley Cup (1999)

Stanley Cup Final losing appearances – 3 (2000 as Dallas, 1991 & 1981 as Minnesota)

Current Cup Drought – 11 years

NEW YORK RANGERS – 4 Stanley Cups (1994, 1940, 1933, 1928)

Stanley Cup Final losing appearances – 6 (1979, 1972, 1950, 1937, 1932, 1929)

Current Cup Drought – 16 years

**FLORIDA PANTHERS – zero Stanley Cups

Stanley Cup Final losing appearances – 1 (1996)

Current Cup Drought – 16 years (since joining the NHL in 1993-94)

MONTREAL CANADIENS – 23 Stanley Cups (1993, 1986, 1979, 1978, 1977, 1976, 1973, 1971, 1969, 1968, 1966, 1965, 1960, 1959, 1958, 1957, 1956, 1953, 1946, 1944, 1931, 1930, 1924) – also one Cup in 1916 before the formation of the NHL

Stanley Cup Final losing appearances – 8 (1989, 1967, 1955, 1954, 1952, 1951, 1947, 1925)

note: the 1919 Stanley Cup Final between the Canadiens and Seattle was cancelled due to the Influenza Epidemic

Current Cup Drought – 17 years

**OTTAWA SENATORS – zero Stanley Cups (the previous Ottawa Senators franchise records are kept separate from this current incarnation)

Stanley Cup Final appearances – 1 (2007)

Current Cup Drought – 17 years (since joining the NHL in 1992-93)

**SAN JOSE SHARKS – zero Stanley Cups

Stanley Cup Final losing appearances – zero

Current Cup Drought – 18 years (since joining the NHL in 1991-92)

EDMONTON OILERS – 5 Stanley Cups (1990, 1988, 1987, 1985, 1984)

Stanley Cup Final losing appearances – 2 (2006, 1983)

Current Cup Drought – 20 years

CALGARY FLAMES – 1 Stanley Cup (1989)

Stanley Cup Final losing appearances – 2 (2004, 1986)

Current Cup Drought – 21 years

NEW YORK ISLANDERS – 4 Stanley Cups (1983, 1982, 1981, 1980)

Stanley Cup Final losing appearances – 1 (1984)

Current Cup Drought – 27 years

**PHOENIX COYOTES – zero Stanley Cups

Stanley Cup Final losing appearances – zero

Current Cup Drought – 30 years (since joining the NHL as the Jets in 1979-80)

**WASHINGTON CAPITALS – zero Stanley Cups

Stanley Cup Final losing appearances – 1 (1998)

Current Cup Drought – 35 years (since joining the NHL in 1974-75)

PHILADELPHIA FLYERS – 2 Stanley Cups (1975, 1974)

Stanley Cup Final losing appearances – 5 (1997, 1987, 1985, 1980, 1976,)

Current Cup Drought – 35 years

BOSTON BRUINS – 5 Stanley Cups (1972, 1970, 1941, 1939, 1929)

Stanley Cup Final losing appearances – 12 (1990, 1988, 1978, 1977, 1974, 1958, 1957, 1953, 1946, 1943, 1930, 1927)

Current Cup Drought – 38 years

**BUFFALO SABRES – zero Stanley Cups

Stanley Cup Final losing appearances – 2 (1999, 1975)

Current Cup Drought – 39 years (since joining the NHL in 1970-71)

**VANCOUVER CANUCKS – zero Stanley Cups

Stanley Cup Final losing appearances – 2 (1982, 1994)

Current Cup Drought – 39 years (since joining the NHL in 1970-71)

**ST. LOUIS BLUES – zero Stanley Cups

Stanley Cup Final losing appearances – 3 (1968, 1969, 1970)

Current Cup Drought – 42 years (since joining the NHL in 1967-68)

**LOS ANGELES KINGS – zero Stanley Cups

Stanley Cup Final losing appearances – 1 (1993)

Current Cup Drought – 42 years (since joining the NHL in 1967-68)

TORONTO MAPLE LEAFS – 13 Stanley Cups (1967, 1964, 1963, 1962, 1951, 1949, 1948, 1947, 1945, 1942, 1932, 1922, 1918) – one as the St. Pats and one as the Arenas

Stanley Cup Final losing appearances – 8 (1960, 1959, 1940, 1939, 1938, 1936, 1935, 1933)

Current Cup Drought – 43 years

CHICAGO BLACKHAWKS – 3 Stanley Cups (1961, 1938, 1934)

Stanley Cup Final losing appearances – 7 (1992, 1973, 1971, 1965, 1962, 1944, 1931)

Current Cup Drought – 49 years

Of the current thirty NHL franchises, seventeen have won the Stanley Cup.

Only six teams have failed to at least advance to the Stanley Cup Final.  Four of those six franchises have joined the NHL in the past decade (Nashville, Atlanta, Minnesota, and Columbus), so their track record is not that bad…yet.

The biggest non-achievers in terms of the National Hockey League are the Phoenix Coyotes and the San Jose Sharks.

The Sharks came into being when the Gund Brothers engineered a franchise split with the Minnesota North Stars in 1991.  Despite having stellar regular season teams for the past few seasons, the Sharks have been unable to get near the Cup Final.

As for the Coyotes, they began life in 1972 as the Winnipeg Jets of the World Hockey Association.  The seven years they spent in that rebel league were fruitful, as they won three Avco World Trophies, and arguably, were better than a number of NHL teams at the time…Colorado Rockies, Cleveland Barons, Detroit Red Wings, etc.

Along with the Whalers, Nordiques, and Oilers, the Jets were absorbed into the NHL in time for the 1979-80 season.  Most of their good players were reclaimed by the existing NHL clubs, and even though the Jets iced a number of competitive teams in the mid-80’s, they have never come close to making it to the Stanley Cup Final, either in Winnipeg, or in Phoenix, where they relocated in time for the 1995-96 campaign.

The underlying point to all is this a blunt one; a team’s window-of-opportunity to win the Stanley Cup is a narrow one at best.  When you’re one of the top eight teams in the league, it’s probably worth it to roll the dice and do whatever you deem necessary to win it all.  If not, your Stanley Cup Drought will only drag on.

-  Mick Kern

(all stats as of 04-02-10  -  if any of the stats are wrong, please contact me)

Mick Kern appears courtesy of Live From Wayne Gretzky’s

Imagine, if you can, being Colin Campbell these days.

Among your many tasks with the National Hockey League is the job of deciding when to levy supplementary discipline for a rule infraction.

Regardless of who that player is, and how heinous their on-ice crime may have been, immediately one of the thirty teams, and their fan base, and the media that covers them, will believe you to be a complete idiot.

If you choose to suspend that player, but only a couple of games, then the team, fans and media of the player aggrieved will also believe you to be a complete idiot.

If that player transcends his team, then more fans, and more media, will share that opinion.

As Colin Campbell, when you have had to let a number of on-ice incidents slide because of a variety of factors, then you are accused of applying a “wheel-of-justice” approach to discipline.

Regardless of the logic that you apply to each individual incident, your work as the league disciplinarian will be looked at as a whole, as the media and fans apply the auteur theory to your rap sheet.

You cannot win working under these conditions, because there is no way you’re going to come close to pleasing the majority of hockey people.

So, instead, you have to do what you think is right, what you think is just.

It doesn’t help things when you pass on slapping Matt Cooke of the Penguins on the wrist for his blind-side hit on the Bruins’ Marc Savard…and then only a week later, the league’s premier superstar, Alex Ovechkin, forces you to suspend him for a couple of games for basically a hit from behind on the Blackhawks’ Brian Campbell, on a nationally televised game between two of the league’s top teams.

It doesn’t help when the likes of Washington Capitals’ owner Ted Leonsis publicly muses about the Ovechkin hit, and wonders why the NHL MVP is told to sit for a couple of games, but Cooke gets nothing.  (Then again, as good an owner as Leonsis is, nothing is ever wrong with his team.  Every loss can be explained.  Ahh, newbies).

It doesn’t help when the chattering classes of the internet point out that your son, who plays for the Florida Panthers, will “benefit” from not having to face Ovie when they play the Capitals this week, as ridiculous a claim as there is, but some still went there   (Ahh, idiots).

I don’t know about other North American sports, but it’s always amazed me how hockey fans honestly believe they each know what is best for the sport.  That passion, as blind and as pig-headed as it often is, reminds me of the passion of European soccer fans.  Now, we haven’t taken to the worst excesses of that species yet, though a stroll through the myriad of team-themed on-line sites may suggest those days are inching closer.

Personally, I seem to disagree with Colin Campbell on roughly a third of his calls, though all things considered, I thought the league would pass on a suspension for Ovechkin; a plausible argument can be made either way.

I also have a theory that many in the NHL, maybe even Campbell himself, like the very rough stuff, the play that goes over the line.  No, they don’t want to see anybody seriously hurt, but a little ultra-violence never hurt the ratings now, did it?

What I do like about Campbell is that he sticks his chin out there after making a judgement, and stands by it.  It doesn’t appear as though he sticks his finger in the air to judge which way the wind is blowing, despite what you or I might personally believe.  The two-game suspension to Ovechkin might be an exception, but hey, we all answer to other people in whatever line of work we are in, so maybe his hand was forced.

Some will say that is a good thing.  Some will say idiot.

The life of Colin Campbell.

- Mick Kern

Mick Kern appears courtesy of Live From Wayne Gretzky’s

Can somebody please drive a broken composite stick through the heart of that saying that is trotted out every time a big trade is made in the National Hockey League?

You know the saying; whichever team ends up with the best player wins the trade.

Yeah, says who?

Sam Pollock, that’s who.  The legendary general manager of the Montreal Canadiens worked the phones at a time when it often seemed that half of his fellow GM’s in the league approached their job like it was a hobby, something they did for kicks after the dishes were done.

In this day-and-age, despite what the frothing fan base of a particular franchise may feel, every one of the thirty NHL general managers are top notch.  In this instantaneous over-informed society we live in, there is no way a GM not up to the job would last for any length of time.  They would very quickly be exposed.  Bob Pulford should thank his lucky stars he handled the job at a time when dinosaurs such as Bill Wirtz walked the Earth.

When two teams make a major trade, such as the one the Calgary Flames and Toronto Maple Leafs engineered on the last day of January, some hockey pundit somewhere will bring up that old Sam Pollock saying.

It’s often true; just think of the Montreal Canadiens moving disgruntled goaltender Patrick Roy (along with Mike Keane) to the newly minted Colorado Avalanche in exchange for goaltender Jocelyn Thibault, and forwards Andrei Kovalenko and Martin Rucinsky (December 6^th, 1995).

But it’s not always the case.

Steve Simmons uttered the Sam Pollock phrase on “The Reporters” on TSN, citing defenceman Dion Phaneuf as the best player in the Flames/Maple Leafs deal.

If that is indeed correct, then why did Flames’ GM Darryl Sutter trade the best player?  Did Sutter bump his head during a weekend trip to Okotoks?

Of course not; Sutter appraised his team, what it needed and what could be sacrificed, all the time keeping in mind the underlying factor of the salary cap, and its often far-reaching implications.

Maple Leafs’ GM Brian Burke did the same thing to his team, and presto, we had a big trade to discuss.

On paper, or at least on a piece of paper dated January 31^st, 2008, Phaneuf is without question the best player in the swap.  But that is a long two years ago.  Since then, Phaneuf has become everybody’s favourite whipping boy, and as the Flames were awash in expensive defenceman, it was pretty clear they would move the underachieving, at times selfish, rearguard.

Time will tell if Phaneuf is the best player in the deal.  Maybe big defenceman Keith Aulie will end up being the best player.  That’s the chance any team takes when it swaps warm bodies.

The Calgary Flames traded Brett Hull to the St. Louis Blues.  The young emerging sniper went on to a Hall-of-Fame career.  The Flames profited from that trade by winning the 1989 Stanley Cup.  Hull would not win a Cup in St. Louis.

The Golden Brett was the best player in the trade in hindsight.  Even at the time of the transaction, the Flames knew they were giving up a future superstar.  Still, who won that trade?

That March 7^th, 1988 trade breaks down as such…Brett Hull, and Steve Bozak to the Blues for defenceman Rob Ramage and goaltender Rick Wamsley.  The Flames were upset that spring by the Edmonton Oilers (Wayne Gretzky’s final hurrah as an Oiler), but Ramage was a key part of the Redwood defence that helped the Flames win it all a year later.

Speaking of blockbusters, how about Gretzky going to the Los Angeles Kings during the summer of 1988?  It put hockey on the map, as the cliché goes, in many non-traditional markets in the U.S. (feel free to debate the pros and cons of that result), but the Kings never won the Stanley Cup.  They lost to Montreal in 1993, while the Oilers won the 1990 Cup, two seasons after trading The Great One.  As for Gretzky, he never won another Stanley Cup after 1988.

Who won that Gretzky trade?  Well, the Kings, even though they never won the Cup.  If anything, that trade was a harbinger of what the NHL would face during the 1990’s; the marginalization of small market teams and the resulting player moves necessistated by monetary concerns.

That August 9^th, 1988 trade breaks down as such…Gretzky goes to the Kings along with Marty McSorley and Mike Krushelnyski.  To the Oilers goes Martin Gelinas, Jimmy Carson, 1^st round draft picks in 1989, 1991, and 1993 and money.

Money, because Oilers’ owner Peter Pocklington was beginning to experience the first of his many business/legal headaches to follow.  “I’d Trade Him Again”, indeed.

Gelinas and Carson were key members of that 1990 Stanley Cup winning squad in Edmonton.

Even if either Phaneuf or Aulie outperforms the players sent to Southern Alberta in this latest blockbuster, when a GM makes a trade, he’s looking to improve his team, not worrying about the legacy of the trade.  If his team improves, either short-term for a playoff drive, or long-term, then the legacy issue usually takes care of itself.

Exhibit B about the foolhardiness of investing 100% faith in the Pollock saying also involves the Calgary Flames.

Flames fans were up-in-arms when Magic Kent Nilsson was traded to the Minnesota North Stars on June 15^th, 1985.  Through that trade, the Flames received two draft picks, one which they used to grab Joe Nieuwendyk in the second round (27^th overall) in the 1985 NHL Entry Draft.

When Nilsson hoisted the 1987 Stanley Cup with the hated Edmonton Oilers, many Flames’ fans decried the earlier trade, asking “Joe Who?” about Nieuwendyk, until Joe Who popped in 51 goals as a rookie in 1987-88.

Joe Who was part of the Flames 1989 Stanley Cup team, so when it came time for Calgary to move him along to the Dallas Stars (December 19^th, 1995), they got Corey Millen, and some guy named Jarome Iginla.

Iginla had been the Stars 1^st round draft pick in 1995, and all these years later, the captain of the Flames is a reasonable bet to make the Hockey Hall-of-Fame upon his retirement.

Still, some Flames’ fans grumbled about losing Joe Who to the Stars.  You’d think they’d have learned their lesson; the team that gets the “best player” in the trade doesn’t necessarily win the trade.

The Minnesota North Stars got Nilsson, but he won a Cup with the Oilers.  The Dallas Stars got Nieuwendyk, and he helped them win their only Cup, but they paid a heavy price in giving up Iginla.

Arguably, both teams won that trade.

Then there’s the June 13^th, 1987 swap between the Quebec Nordiques and the Washington Capitals.  Dale Hunter, the heart and soul of the 1980’s Quebec Nordiques went to D.C., and coming back to Quebec was a draft choice that ended up being Joe Sakic.

(The actual trade was Gaeten Duchesne, Alan Haworth and a 1^st round draft pick to Washington for Dale Hunter and Clint Malarchuk).

Perennial playoff failures, the Capitals got a shot-in-the-arm with the inclusion of Hunter on their roster, and they finally won a Game Seven in overtime when La Petite Peste scored on a breakaway against the Flyers’ Ron Hextall the following spring.

The Nordiques entered some very bleak years, before stockpiling high draft picks, and emerging as a young, promising team, led by Sakic.

Both teams can claim to have won that trade, all depending on how you view it.  The Capitals needed to change up their chemistry, and the Nords needed to rebuild.  Both succeeded thanks in large part to that trade.

In reality, the team that really won that trade was the Colorado Avalanche, but no-one had any inkling of that reality back when the Hunter trade was consummated.

A final note.  Even if Dion Phaneuf wins the Norris Trophy, the Leafs/Flames trade is not even close to being a duplicate of the January 2^nd, 1992 trade that brought Doug Gilmour to Toronto, despite what the Toronto-based hockey media has been repeating over and over and over again.

The Flames and Maple Leafs exchanged five players each that day, with Gilmour being the prime asset.  He was a very good player with Calgary (and St. Louis before that), and thanks to a contract impasse with GM Doug Risebrough and the Flames’ brass, Gilmour was shipped out-of-town.

This transaction actually fits the Sam Pollock saying about which team wins a trade.

Even on that day, unless you were a diehard Flames fan, one could see the Leafs “won” that trade.  The inspired play of Gilmour, and the sizeable contributions of the likes of Jamie Macoun, and Ric Nattress, far out shadowed the meager contributions in Cowtown of the likes of Gary Leeman and Michel Petit.

I know, for I had a sprited argument with the Calgary cabbie who was dropping me off at the Calgary airport that evening, as I was returning to Toronto after spending Christmas with the family.  He was convinced that the Gilmour trade would put the Flames over the top, as they were getting 50-goal scorer Leeman.

Leeman would win his only Stanley Cup two seasons later as a role player with the 1993 Montreal Canadiens.  His stay in Calgary was brief and uneventful.

The Toronto Maple Leafs and GM Cliff Fletcher won that trade easily.  It helped revive, on-ice, that franchise, and set up the Leafs to enjoy, for the most part, a rather successful decade.  In both 1993, and 1994, the Leafs were legitimate Cup contenders.

That was a trade that shook up the NHL.  The current Flames/Maple Leafs trade only shakes up those two teams.

- Mick Kern

Mick Kern appears courtesy of Live From Wayne Gretzky’s

The Curse of the Locusts is over.

Way before any of these much-hyped Winter Classic outdoor NHL games, the New York Rangers and Los Angeles Kings faced off in the great outdoors for an exhibition match in September of 1991.

The game was held outside of Caesar’s Palace in Las Vegas, and at one point, they had to stop things to deal with an infestation of locusts, as if the Hockey Gods were signalling their displeasure with how Their Game had be reduced to a Vegas sideshow…and the coming expansion of the NHL into the Sun Belt.

With the Boston Bruins’ 2-1 overtime win over the Philadelphia Flyers at the snowy confines of Fenway Park, we finally have a notch under the win column for the home team.

The way things were going, the home town had to accept the inevitability of a defeat in exchange for the privilege of hosting the gala affair.

Maybe the Hockey Gods finally approve.

In November of 2003, in bitter cold weather, the Montreal Canadiens upended the hometown Edmonton Oilers 4-3 in the Heritage Classic.

Two years ago, during the first Winter Classic, held in the snow globe commonly known as Ralph Wilson Stadium, the Pittsburgh Penguins edged the hometown Buffalo Sabres 2-1 in a shootout.

Last year, the defending Stanley Cup champion Detroit Red Wings defeated the hometown Chicago Blackhawks 6-4 at Wrigley Field.

Of course, back during the dawn of professional hockey, they played outdoors on a regular basis, though that feels like two centuries ago, so that doesn’t count.

As for Winter Classic Mark III, I think this proves that actual goals are important in hockey.

Yes, I can hear the old fogies now, and I was once in lockstep with them.  A good game is not contingent on the number of goals, it’s the number of chances and the overall flow of the game.

To those points, I still agree, though I think both are trumped by the actual scoring of goals.

For it’s when they light the lamp that the crowd really gets into the game.  Sure, a good body check, or a great save, or even a fight, will all elicit excited responses from the crowd, but the goal of the game is still, well, goals.  Score more than the other guys.

The ice conditions at Fenway were as probably favourable as they’ll ever be for one of these outside dances, meaning both the Flyers and Bruins were able to play a game resembling an everyday  NHL contest, albeit with the heating broken and some wind to contend with.

Though maybe that’s the problem, the fact they could play a reasonable facsimile of an indoor NHL game; maybe that speaks more of a continuing tightening of defensive systems and the resulting anti-surfeit of scoring in the league.

The Flyers held a 1-0 lead for a sizeable portion of the game, and though the quality of play was arguably superior to that in Edmonton and Buffalo, there was an underlying feeling the game hadn’t nearly reached its entertainment potential; well, that was the sentiment in my basement.

Early on, Shawn Thornton and Daniel Carcillo exchanged late Christmas cards to each other’s face, which instantly made them the answers to a trivia question.  The bout in unto itself was not particularly noteworthy, so the game was still searching for its signature moment.

There were a couple of breakaway chances that Tim Thomas turned aside, and you could go a number of games during any given week in the NHL and not see a guy sprung free, so that was nice.

But the game needed a goal, if possible, a big goal.

The Flyers scored first, thanks mainly to Thomas deciding to go all Ron Hextall on Scott Hartnell just as a point shot was threading its way into the back of his net.

The reigning Vezina Trophy winner more than made up for that gaffe, providing visual evidence why U.S.A. Olympic Team general manager Brian Burke made him one of three goaltenders on the American hockey squad for Vancouver.

Still, this game came to life when old pro Mark Recchi scored to tie it with 2:18 left in the third period.

That’s when the game came to resemble an NBA game.  You know, you only watch a basketball game for the last two minutes.

The offensive thrusts into the zones were numerous, and both teams created scoring chances, if only from the hurried nature of those last 120 seconds.

Naturally, the game went into extra innings, and the home team got the extra point, and as importantly, the extra style point, for winning it, sending the Bleacher Bums home happy.

If the game had ended 1-0 Flyers, much of the talk would have been about Tim Thomas, and how he let his mask slip, and a goal resulted as a result.  If that score had stood, I would have nominated him First Star for creating the best offensive chance of the game.

Thankfully, this was not to be the case, and the 2010 edition of the Winter Classic will probably go down in most people’s books as indeed a classic.

It wasn’t.

It was a good game, not a great game.  Like most good games, it had moments, though those moments only served to whet the appetite for more such moments.

The build-up to the game was nicely handled, as were those TV commercials with Alex Ovechkin and his Caps’ taking on the Flyers on the frozen tarmac of what appeared to be Ronald Reagan Washington National Airport in Arlington.  Now that would be a Winter Classic.   Best goal of the day was Ovechkin’s shot into the bulldozer.

After a couple of hours of reflection, I still think the NHL should keep to one Outdoor Classic a year.  Yes, the Canadian franchises want to share in the fun, and yes, NBC wants two American teams participating on TV.  Which means as it stands now, the six Canadian teams won’t get invited to the party.

And that’s how it should be.  Despite all the overwrought prose about kids playing hockey outdoors, this game is one big novelty.  A little sugar with the medicine for all those non-hockey fans who are sitting on the couch on New Year’s Day.  It’s tailor-made for the sports tourists, who can gasp at all the pretty pictures from the blimp.

This is one thing NHL that should remain south-of-the-border.  It won’t.  There will be two Winter Classics a season very soon.  Which will take away somewhat from the feeling of being or watching a special event.

Be the first on your block to own the latest toy, before all the nerdy kids get one too!

The Hockey Gods may look down and yawn.

As long as they don’t send the damned locusts again.

- Mick Kern

Mick Kern appears courtesy of Live From Wayne Gretzky’s

Andrei Markov is back with the Montreal Canadiens, almost two months ahead of schedule, after suffering a serious injury on the opening night of the season.

Which is great news for me, as I picked him up off waivers about a week ago in my fantasy league.

Injuries are part of the territory when one is a professional athlete.  Whether they are career threatening injuries, or just a nagging niggling day-to-day ailment, sports fans often forget that these guys aren’t video game characters, they are flesh-and-blood.

The human body, even a well-tuned body, still requires proper rest and care in order to recuperate from a physical set-back.

The time-table for an athlete to return-to-action varies by person, but suffice-to-say there is no magic sponge that is waved over the player, and he miraculously climbs out-of-bed and gets back on the ice or field, despite evidence to the contrary every four years in the World Cup.

The body is a complicated machine.  It requires proper maintenance, and, if necessary, repairs, like any other finely tuned machine.

Yet most of us gloss over those blood-and-guts details when scanning the IR list of our favourite team.  How long until Player X is back from that anterior ligament exterior alleviated pulled muscle thingy?

I’m no different, possibly in part due to the luck of never having broken or sprained anything during my brief athletic career.  There was that one time during high school football that my brand new cleats caused two huge red raw popped blisters on both of my heels, which meant much pain when doing something as simple as walking, but that only lasted about half-a-week.

Sports injuries remained, for me, a mere nuisance, particularly when managing my fantasy teams…until this past Christmas Night at 10:30 pm.

That was the exact moment when all the adults up in the living room at our house heard a series of high-pitched screams emanating from the basement.

The boys said they were just playing Xbox, but for some reason, my five-year-old decided it was a good time to launch a body slam at the visiting 10-year-old, who responded with evasive action that led to my boy tumbling head-over-heels into the thinly-carpeted, unforgiving concrete floor, and landing square on his right arm.

Which caused both bones to snap, between the wrist and the elbow.

Which led to those screams of pain, and Mommy running down the stairs in record time.

Which led to a premature end to the Christmas Day festivities, and a hasty visit to the Emergency Room at Toronto East General Hospital.

We got lucky here, as when the three of us strolled in, the three admitting nurses were sitting around chatting, maybe exchanging Christmas war stories.  A scant twenty minutes later, the place began to fill up with the walking wounded.

My son was attended to right away, and after being weighed, he was prepped for the doctor.

Canada comes under criticism, including here at home, about the inadequacies of our public health system, but I’ve always maintained that while we may indeed have long waiting lines at hospitals in this country, as least we have lines.  A quick glance at the sheet of fees posted in the admitting room indicated that a mere visit would set one back in excess of four hundred dollars, if not for OHIP (our public health plan in the province of Ontario), wonky and imperfect as it may be.

My son was in a lot of pain as the nurses prepared a sling for his injured wing.  The three of us waited for about an hour as the doctors dealt with much more urgent matters.

A room came open around 2:00 am.  The boy was wheeled in, and was prepped for the procedure to realign the two broken bones, as Dr. Isaac Moss wanted to avoid surgery if at all possible.

The calculation for how much drugs had to be administered was off , which led to my son being unfortunately awake for the first part of the procedure, which meant he was in a heck of a lot of pain, until they rectified the situation, after no doubt feeling the hot darts emanating from my wife’s eyes

My boy didn’t do himself any favours, thanks to a stubbornness inherited from his mother; he fought the effects of the drug, all the while imploring Mommy to take him home.

Eventually, a cast was applied to his right arm, and we now begin at least a six-week journey of doctor appointments, and therapy, hopefully ending with my kid’s right arm as good as new.

There will be no rushing of this process.

Which only leads me to shake my head when I think of pro athletes who suffer similar and often far worse, injuries, yet are back playing well before initially projected.

Once upon a time, and no doubt even now, players were purposely rushed back, as the old-school mentality (that should be NO-school mentality) believed that one should play through pain, and injuries, and such things as having one’s bell rung.

That outdated thinking is slowly becoming exactly that in the sports world, outdated, though there are still holdouts hiding in the caves of ignorance, the same caves that are full of folk who blame the victim for incidents such as hits-from-behind.

Even with the best medical care that money can buy, I’m still amazed that someone such as Markov is back-on-the-ice way ahead of schedule, and except for the extra pounds he gained from shoving back those great hot dogs they make in Montreal, he’s back to his usual All-Star form.

The good Doctor told us that a kid my son’s age stands a much better chance of having his bones repair themselves fully without surgery, as opposed to adults.  He will still have to put up with the major inconvenience of that cast until around Valentine’s Day, yet Markov is back out there, playing hockey at the highest level, almost two months ahead of schedule.  Sure, medicine is an inexact science, but two months early?

No, he didn’t break a bone, but the injury he incurred opening night against the Maple Leafs, a lacerated ankle injury, after a collision with goaltender Carey Price’s skate, could have ended Markov’s career.

Instead, he returns early, scoring two goals that first game back.

I don’t care how tough these guys are, that injury had to hurt.

My son has had a difficult time falling asleep the first few nights since the accident.  His cast gets in the way of sleeping, and his arm has to be elevated in order to reduce swelling.  It’s not a lot of fun.  Injuries hurt.

Something to keep in mind the next time you’re apt to complain about a player on your team taking his good ole’ time returning to action after suffering an injury.

Life ain’t a video game.

- Mick Kern

Mick Kern appears courtesy of Live From Wayne Gretzky’s

Earlier today, I saw a list of National Hockey League players who played a thousand or more regular season games in the league.

How many players have had the opportunity to suit up for an NHL team since the league formed in 1917?  Five thousand?  Can’t be that many, seeing that for twenty-five years, there were only six teams in the circuit.  Before 1942, when there were more teams in the league, how big were the rosters?

Whatever that number may be, as of Friday, November 13^th, 2009, from what I could see, only 238 players have played at least 1000 regular-season NHL games.  One might expect the giants of the game to be on that list, after all, you’d have to be pretty good to last that long in the world’s premier hockey league.  Or would you?  Maybe you just have to be good enough to stick around, just good enough to fill out the fourth line.

Gordie Howe leads the list with 1767 games under his belt during a 26-year NHL career, and that doesn’t take into account his years in the World Hockey Association.  Mark Messier follows Mr. Hockey, falling 11 games short of his total.  Ron Francis gets the bronze medal with 1731 games played, Chris Chelios has participated in 1644 games in the NHL…and possibly counting…and Dave Andreychuk sits in fifth spot with 1639.

The first three are Hall-of-Famers, Chelios will be one day if he ever decides to retire, and a good case can be made for Andreychuk to be there too.

Scanning down the list, most of the players listed near the top are Hall-of-Famers.  Scott Stevens, Ray Bourque, Larry Murphy, Johnny Bucyk, Steve Yzerman; just some of the names that pop out at you.  All of them great players during their tour-of-duty in the NHL.

But what about the plumbers, the spear-carriers, the lunch-bucket guys who turned a skill set based on limited talent and hard work into an NHL career that spanned over 1000 games?  When you think about it, it’s those guys that deserved the proverbial gold watch.  Most hockey fans probably would be unaware that they played that many games in the league.

How about defenceman Luke Richardson, who got into 1417 games over the course of his 20-year NHL career that was spent with 6 teams, including two stops in Toronto?  No-one should seriously consider Richardson for the Hall-of-Fame, but this steady D-man sits 22^nd on the list of games played.  Only 21 other players have a longer service record that Luke Richardson.  That’s gotta count for something.

Or how about, in 31^st spot, Doug Mohns, who played 1390 games spread over 22 years and five teams, most of them with the Bruins and Blackhawks well before the 1967 expansion?

And what about Dean Prentice (1378), or Ron Stewart (1353), or how about James Patrick (1280), or Marc Bergevin (1191)?

Marc Bergevin???

I remember a lot of hockey players, but this guy totally slipped my mind, until I saw him sitting at number 82 on the list.  Is he mostly remembered for his wacky sense-of-humour?

The 60^th overall draft pick of the Chicago Black Hawks in 1983, Bergevin played those 1191 games wearing the colours of the Black Hawks, (when they still went with Black Hawks, not Blackhawks), the Islanders, Whalers, Lightning, Red Wings, Blues, Penguins, Tampa again, and finally the Vancouver Canucks.

Reminds me of Mike Sillinger, who recently retired after putting 1049 on his NHL clock, playing for a record 12 different NHL franchises over 18 seasons.

Again, only 238 NHL players have reached the 1000 game mark, and Marc Bergevin and Mike Sillinger are two of them?  No offense intended to either gentleman, but both their names do not leap-to-mind when I think of long careers.

But I am wrong.  Very wrong.  Other foot soldiers that dodged bullets and made their Grand Mark on the game include Derian Hatcher, Curtis Leschyshyn, Gaetan Duschesne, Don Lever, Todd Gill, Dallas Drake, and Tie Domi?

Tie Domi got into 1020 NHL regular season games.  How did he manage that?  The dude could skate, and he had better hands than most enforcers.

Sitting at number 238, as of the day I checked the list, right on 1000 games, is Hockey Hall-of-Famer Bernie Federko, a magician with the puck during his heyday with the St. Louis Blues.

Mark Recchi of the Boston Bruins leads all active players with 1500 games played, and that’s good for 14^th on the list.  And what a career he’s had.  Think of those early years with the Penguins, and then his point-scoring explosion while a member of the Philadelphia Flyers.  Good enough for the Hall-of-Fame?  He’s at least in the discussion.

A thousand games in the NHL?  That’s an accomplishment to be proud of.

- Mick Kern

Mick Kern appears courtesy of Live From Wayne Gretzky’s

All-Hit Hockey, all the time.  Give the people what they want.

Almost to a person, any hockey fan I’ve spoken with loves the rough stuff.  No, not the silly staged stuff…fighting…but the rough stuff.

The big hits, the little hits, the scrum in front of the net, digging for the puck in the corners, the constant down-low battles for position;  remove these elements from the game, and you’ll severely cripple hockey.  Even if you’re a fan who watches the game for breathtakking exhibits of skills such as tape-to-tape passes, any radical dialing down of hitting in hockey serves to curtail the beauty of other aspects of the game.

In what manner, you ask?  If by only cheapening them, for a large part of what makes a beautiful goal such a beautiful work-of-art is the stressful conditions under which it was scored.  The gifted player can somehow find room to negotiate out there, creating something out of nothing.  If every player could do that, would it be so special?

This argument in no way intends to suggest that we should have less goals scored; if anything, we need more skilled players and more scoring in the league. But don’t just hand it to them on a silver platter.  They have to earn it.  Hockey is still a combination of skill and size, brains and brawn, creation and intimidation.

Here are five hits, or examples of physical contact, in the past week that have come under the microscope:

- Willie Mitchell on Jonathan Toews

- Evgeni Artyukhin slew foot on Matt Niskenen

- Alexander Ovechkin slew foot on Rich Peverley

- Tuomo Ruutu hit on Darcy Tucker

- Mike Richards hit on David Booth

Each incident has to be viewed, and initially judged, separately.  Where the real fun begins is in the reality that no matter how clearly one spells out the definition of illegal hits in the National Hockey League, it is impossible to get everyone to agree on the legality and severity of most hits.

Take the case of Willie Mitchell of the Vancouver Canucks levelling Jonathan Toews of the Chicago Blackhawks.

From my perspective, which translates to absolutely no rooting interest for either team or player, it was a clean hit.  Devastating, yes, but within the rules of the game of hockey.  Not within the rules as in one toe almost over the line, but comfortably within the rules.

From what I could see, Mitchell didn’t run at Toews, didn’t leave his feet, didn’t put his elbow or stick up, and Toews was in possession of the puck.  It was a clean open-ice hit.

It hurt Toews, to the point he had to sit out after that, but hockey is a rough, physical game.  Even Chicago head coach Joel Quenneville was quick to dismiss any talk of it being a dirty hit.

No suspension was warranted.

The hit by Mike Richards of the Philadelphia Flyers on David Booth of the Florida Panthers was also devastating, but to my eyes, it was a late hit.  Booth had dished off the puck, but even at the high speed that the game is played at, Richards had enough time to ease up on his contact.

He chose not to.

The key is to watch the replay in real-time, not slow motion.  The very act of you opening your own front door, when viewed in slow motion, would look like a criminal act.  Slow motion is good in helping determine factors involved in a questionable hit, such as leaving the feet, or position of an elbow, but since life doesn’t happen at that languid pace, to properly and fairly judge an act on-the-ice, it must be watched in real-time.

Even then, Richards still had time to ease off.  If anything, it appears, and I stress APPEARS, as if Richards elevated himself just enough to take a shot at Booth’s head.

Regardless of the validity of that last statement, Richards still delivered a late hit.  Sure, you can drag out the hoary reply that Booth should have been aware of everyone around him, but he can’t watch all five Flyer skaters.  Richards came out-of-nowhere and decked him, when he didn’t have the puck, which is against the rules.  This is not a repeat of the Mitchell hit on Toews.

A suspension is warranted.

The Tuomo Ruutu hit on Darcy Tucker of the Colorado Avalanche certainly appears to be a hit-from-behind to me, though not a seemingly devastating one.  Nonetheless, Tucker was hurt on the play.  Many are saying that there was no intention by Ruutu to injure Tucker, and from what the video replay reveals to me, I’d agree with that sentiment , but should that matter?

Someone is going to get seriously hurt in one of these scenarios in the future, and unless there is a zero tolerance to hits from behind of any magnitude, yes, even accidental ones, then prepare yourself for an onslaught of handwringing when they’re putting some stiff six feet under the day after such a hit.

Ruutu was suspended three games.

As it was a hit-from-behind, regardless of intention, the suspension was warranted.

The Evgeni Artyukhin slew foot on Matt Niskenen of the Dallas Stars is clearly that, an attempt to take the player’s feet out from under him.  Even if Artyukhin claims post-game, as he has, that that is not what he intended, the video evidence (thanks YouTube) shows otherwise.  The danger of the ages-old slew foot is having the duped player bounce his head off the ice.  In this instance, Niskenen fell onto his front, predominantly on his left arm.

The three-game suspension was warranted.

Maybe it helps being a superstar, because Alexander Ovechkin slew footed Rich Peverley of the Atlanta Thrashers, and was not suspended.

And you know what, he shouldn’t have been suspended.  The league got this one right.  Carefully watch the video, at real-time, and do you not see Peverley and Ovechkin battling for the puck, and the momentum of Ovechkin’s body carrying into Peverley, and upending him?

There was no slew foot delivered in the manner in which Artyukhin took out Niskanen.  From what I can recall, Ovechkin received a penalty, which was a good call; even an accidental trip is still a trip, but this incident was the direct result of a typical battle for the puck during a game.

Ovechkin is a supremely talented player, and he likes to engage in physical play, and every so often, the chippy side of him emerges.  One day, he’ll get under someone’s skin out there, and they will retaliate.  Fans of the Washington Capitals get all apoplectic when this is mentioned, but they are clearly thinking with their hearts, and not their heads.

Regardless…in this instance, no suspension was warranted.

The thing is, in all five instances, someone else could look at the very same video I just watched, and legitimately come up with five different conclusions.  That is what makes policing this game so difficult.

- Mick Kern

Mick Kern appears courtesy of Live From Wayne Gretzky’s

Back in those (mostly) innocent days when I was a kid, one sports story that worked its way through my Grade Four classroom was the sordid tale of a couple of New York Yankees pitchers that swapped their entire families.  Not just their wives, but also their kids and their dogs.  No word if the furniture was thrown in, or if there was a set-of-dishes to be named later.

Mike Kekich and Fritz Peterson were solid pitchers for the Yankees, but to a bunch of nine-year-old growing up in suburban Edmonton, these guys were as famous as Reggie Jackson or Catfish Hunter.

It was just plain weird what the southpaws did, never mind what your personal morals may be.  Sure, it was the early 70’s, and the hangover from the technicolour Sixties was upon us, but this went beyond wife swapping.  To this day, I still scratch my head at the notion.

Hockey, being a mostly conservative sport in almost every aspect of that definition, has never publicly had the same arrangement, though you hear stuff sometimes you can’t repeat, though no doubt someone is squirreling it all away for a future tell-all book.

So it comes as a complete shock to me that former Edmonton Oilers’ owner Peter Pocklington reveals in, what else, his new book, that at one point during the early 1980’s, two National Hockey League teams almost went all Kekich/Peterson, and pulled off the most outrageous trade in the history of sports.

Having obviously squirreled away a ton of inside stories over the years, along with a map of where all the bodies are buried, Peter Puck has grabbed the attention for his new book he hoped he would by revealing that he worked out a deal with Toronto Maple Leafs’ legendary owner Harold Ballard that would have seen the two men swap teams.

Swap teams.  Completely.  Which means the fine folk of Edmonton would have been saddled with the complete roster of the early 80’s Maple Leafs, just in time to watch the young guns of the Oilers emege as one of the greatest teams in NHL history.  The trouble is, those young bucks would have been hoisting all those Stanley Cups dressed in Maple Leaf blue.  Worse, the city of Edmonton would have had Ballard within their city borders.

Apparently, for whatever reason, Ballard changed his mind and the entire thing was scuttled.

The mind is boggled at the implications of such a wholesale trade, if it had been allowed to proceed.  Since such a possibility reads like science fiction, let’s put on the Spock ears and follow the changes that would have occurred to our timeline, if that deal had actually gone forward.

It should be noted that the pebble in the pond, check that, the giant boulder in the pond that the Oilers-Leafs swap would have been to the rest of the NHL would have had far-reaching implications, that would still be felt to this day.

The Edmonton Oilers would have moved years ago, if that deal had materialized.  Most likely, the Houston Oilers would have had to wait until the death of Ballard, and the battle over his diminished estate had been settled, before they could finally concentrate on the business of hockey, and during the 1995-96 season, Houston would win the Stanley Cup.

The Quebec Nordiques would still be in the league, though they never would have ended up with goaltender Patrick Roy, and thus, to this day, the Nordiques still would not have won the Stanley Cup, and there are still concerns about building a new arena.  There are whispers the team may move to Kansas City.

Roy would remain with the Montreal Canadiens, though head coach Mario Tremblay would have lost his job as a result.  The Canadiens would make the Cup Final in 1998, losing to the Detroit Red Wings.

The Nordiques would not have been in position to draft Eric Lindros first overall in 1991; that honour went to the Edmonton Oilers, who had earlier traded the rights to the New Jersey Devils for Tom Kurvers, and it was the Devils who took Lindros first that year.

Lindros would thrive in the Swamp, and he never suffered a concussion from that devastating Scott Stevens open-ice hit, as they were on the same team.  Lindros would retire as a member of the Devils, having won three Stanley Cups, in 2000, 2001 and 2003.

A young Peter Forsberg would captain the Philadelphia Flyers to the 1995 Cup.

If Pocklington had ended up with his young team in Toronto, he would have most likely made a ton of cash over what he realized in Northern Alberta.  Even with his business problems that existed in other industries he ran (Gainers Foods), Peter Puck would have not needed to cash in his depreciating asset known as Wayne Gretzky.  Even if he later broke up the Boys On The Bus, odds are Bruce McNall would have been exposed as a charlatan by then, which means the Great One doesn’t end up in L.A, after winning five Cups with Toronto.

Let’s say, instead, Gretzky is traded by the Leafs to the Rangers.  It is he, in 1994, that hoists the Stanley Cup over his head, as the Broadway Blueshirts end their 54-year drought.

As for the Kings, they continue to flounder, though the NHL props them up financially.  As a result, there isn’t a mad rush to pan fool’s gold in the U.S. south, meaning that the likes of the Anaheim Ducks and Florida Panthers never come-to-be.

The NHL still would expand to Ottawa and Tampa, though the Lightning are moved to Minnesota, and that’s where they win the Stanley Cup in 2004 over the Flyers.

The Thrashers and Predators never see the light-of-day, though Penguins’ owner Mario Lemieux threatens to move his team to Nashville if he doesn’t get a sweetheart arena deal from the city of Pittsburgh.

The league is impressed with the Nashville bid, and promises to consider expansion to Tennessee, and Kansas City, in the near future.  Canadian billionaire businessman Jim Balsillie, by now a personal friend of NHL Commissioner Gary Bettman, is often mentioned as the owner of a Nashville NHL franchise.

No-one ever hears about William Boots Del Biaggio.

The Islanders still need a new arena, and threaten to move to Hamilton, which Pocklington blocks.

The Winnipeg Jets still move to Phoenix, as the NHL is emboldened by the relative success of the Houston Oilers and Dallas Stars, though even in this alternative timeline, the Coyotes still lose a ton of money.

The North Stars have moved to Dallas, setting up a great rivalry with Houston, but overall, the NHL have dipped a tentative toe into the expansion waters, instead of diving in headfirst, and ending up with the fractured neck they have now.

Which only goes to prove that in every scenario, no matter how bleak, no matter how wacky, there is always a sliver of hope.

Makes me wish Ballard didn’t get cold feet.

- Mick Kern

Mick Kern appears courtesy of Live From Wayne Gretzky’s

Instead of coming up with a semi-accurate, half-hearted definition of what constitutes a superstar, let’s consult a dictionary.  Since it’s 2009, let’s thumb through an on-line edition.

Superstar, according to Merriam-Webster Online:

• Function: noun
• Date: 1924

1 : a star (as in sports or the movies) who is considered extremely talented, has great public appeal, and can usually command a high salary
2 : one that is very prominent or is a prime attraction <a diplomatic superstar>

When the Dany Heatley trade to San Jose was finally completed over the weekend, a number of sports news services identified Heatley as being a superstar.

A superstar?  Really?  Sure, only two other NHL players have scored more goals since the lockout than Heatley, but does he meet all the qualifications required in order to wear the superstar crown?

From my vantage point, a superstar in any milieu transcends their surroundings.  In other words, even your dear Aunt Gertie that doesn’t like sports knows who, say, Alexander Ovechkin is, and probably has an opinion about him.  Don’t get her going on the hot stick celebration.

Following that line of thinking, I propose that there are currently only two NHL players that are bigger than the sport.

Alexander Ovechkin and Sidney Crosby.  The ying and the yang.  The Beatles and the Stones.  Mario Lemieux and Wayne Gretzky.

Evgeni Malkin should be considered, if only because his on-ice talents are so immense, and only getting stronger, but I haven’t seen any tangible evidence that supports his inclusion into the select club of superstars.  If on-ice talent were the only yardstick being applied, then Pavel Datsyuk or Ilya Kovalchuk, and maybe Dany Heatley, would have to be included.

Where these gentlemen fall short for serious consideration of being called a superstar is this section of the definition:

has great public appeal

Keep-in-mind every individual franchise has a player or two that is held very close to the bosom of the local fanbase, and as such, their respective values are usually inflated.  For instance, Rick Nash of the Columbus Blue Jackets can be one of the most exciting players in the league today.  His YouTube-ready goals, where he dekes through half the team, and some of the guys up in the press box, are a beauty to behold, and understandably, the faithful in Ohio would clamour that Nash is a superstar.

The argument is all context.  Within the world of the Blue Jackets, Nash is the face of the franchise, thus he is a superstar.  Within the expanded world of the National Hockey League, Nash is one of the young stars that make the game so exciting to watch.  You could make a credible argument that Nash is an NHL superstar.

You would have to work awfully hard to convince me that Nash, or Heatley or Datsyuk or Roberto Luongo, are true superstars.  They do not transcend the game of hockey.  Within the hockey world, they are larger-than-life.  Outside of those cozy borders, they would be lost, unrecognizable to the average person walking down the street of any American city.  For that matter, the majority of non-hockey fans in Canada wouldn’t recognize them either.

Put Ovechkin or Crosby in downtown Manhattan (without the Zamboni in Ovechkin’s case), or on Manhattan Beach in Southern California, or in surburban St. Louis or at the Steak ‘n Shake in Battle Creek, Michigan, and most likely both of these dudes would be recognized.

For a variety of reasons, Ovechkin and Crosby are currently bigger than the game of hockey.

That doesn’t mean they’re better or smarter.  That doesn’t mean we should all bow down and praise them (though maybe we should for all the attention they bring to the game).  That doesn’t mean that their opinons are sacrosanct.  So before the mouthbreathing bloggers of the cyberworld get their shorts all in a knot, keep this sobering thought in mind.  Most likely your favourite player is a nobody outside of the world of hockey.  That’s not the case with Ovechkin and Crosby.

Why these two?  Well, we’ve already listed awesome on-ice talent as one major factor, but they have to have more than that.  Both young men have been marketed very successfully, in particular Crosby, who became the face of the NHL as it emerged from the 2004-05 lockout.

Ovechkin basically elbowed his way onto the marquee, and his fun-loving flair that he paints everything he touches with cannot be denied.

The camera likes both of these guys, for different reasons.  The media likes both of these guys, for different reasons.  Hockey fans are drawn to these two guys, for different reasons.  Love them or hate them, you’re talking about them.

Thus it comes as no real surprise that the sports media sought out Crosby and Ovechkin to get their opinions on the recent firing of NHLPA head Paul Kelly.  Some hockey fans ridiculed the need to ask these two particular players their personal opinions.  Where did they get off thinking they were bigger and better than the game?

Well, they don’t think that.  Neither player put out a press release saying “come and talk to me about Paul Kelly”.  It was only natural for the media to beat a path to their doors, because when these two young men speak, people listen.

Much like when a young Wayne Gretzky, after another blowout win over the woeful New Jersey Devils, called the Devils a Mickey Mouse organization.  No truth to the rumour that’s what got Michael Eisner interested in hockey.

Much like when a younger Mario Lemieux, tired of carrying a couple of clutching-and-grabbing defencemen on his back almost every time he broke into the offensive zone, openly questioned the NHL about their lack of enforcement of their own rule book.

The hockey, and sports world, listened.  And yes, some people complained then that Gretzky and Lemieux should just shut up and play the game.  What makes these whippersnappers think they’re bigger than the game?

(There are reactionaries everywhere).

Both players were right. Bang on.  And both were right to speak out.

So when Ovechkin tells espn.com that even if the NHL decides not to participate in the 2014 Winter Olympics, he still plans to go…well folks, that’s news.  Washington Capitals’ owner Ted Leonsis, one of the more progressive owners in the league, did his best to downplay the comments, but the desired effect was already achieved.  It got people, and no doubt the players, thinking about the issue.

Once again, Ovechkin elbowed his way in.

With all due respect, Dany Heatley does not have that same ability.  Nor has he asked for it; if anything, he seems rather happy not to be in the spotlight.  Ovechkin craves it, while Crosby understands he’s been thrust into it since an early age.  Both men handle the spotlight differently, and they handle it well.

Alexander Ovechkin and Sidney Crosby are the only two true superstars in the league today.  Now what remains to be seen is if they can transcend North American popular culture.  Arguably, only two NHL players have ever reached those lofty heights.

Bobby Orr and Wayne Gretzky.

Particularly Wayne Gretzky.  The Great One is still the face of hockey for most of the world.

We tend to throw around words carelessly.  The word great has been mostly stripped of its power.  Anyone that is in the public eye is a star.  In the sports media, we have also devalued the word superstar.  I am trying to reclaim it for those few worthy enough to wear the crown.

Ovechkin and Crosby.

If you don’t like it, deal with it.  You might want to start by shunning all popular media in North America.  No doubt you’ll be seeing the faces of these two men plastered all over television, and magazines, and posters, and websites for the better part of the next decade.

- Mick Kern

Mick Kern appears courtesy of Live From Wayne Gretzky’s

Tuesday night, after attending to some family business, the wife, five-year-old son and I made the trek down to the waterfront here in Toronto to attend the 2009 edition of the Canadian National Exhibition, better known as the CNE, or the Ex, or the grand rip-off, or the sad summer fair that used to mean so much to a city but has been surpassed by year-round theme parks, the internet and twitter.

Regardless, we usually attend the CNE every year.  My wife is a lifelong Toronto girl, and remembers when the place used to matter.  Then again, stop any 16-year-old and they’ll probably tell you what a bitchin’ place it is.  Do they still say bitchin?

Once we navigated our way through the two dollar games, and the fast food stands, and the haunted houses that aren’t scary in-the-least, and the kids’ rides that look like they’ve been in service since 1957, we found our way to the Queen Elizabeth Building, which really does look like it was built in 1957.

The place was jam packed with a dog’s breakfast of booths offering a cornucopia of stuff you really don’t want, unless you’re hungry, tired, and confused at the CNE.  Booths full of scarves, wooden boards with your family name on it, clothes for your dog, overpriced fudge, boring BBC movies, wooden shoes, cheesy t-shirts with YOUR FACE HERE, and hockey cards.

Ahh, an oasis in a sea of suffering, and like a seasoned traveller, I knew where to find this watering hole, because every year they put the same tired old booths in the same tired old places.  Why not change things up a bit?  Then again, consider the type of people who pay good money for the pleasure of dragging their tired feet around the CNE grounds.  Most of these folk probably do not want to have to think, particularly after carrying around an oversized stuffed banana or SpongeBob doll they won at the baseball toss booth, after shelling out over 27 dollars for it.

My wife wandered off to look at the jewelry, while my son and I made a beeline for this great looking plaque of Gerry Cheevers making a kick save.  The dude at the booth only wanted about 50 bucks for it, and no, it wasn’t signed, but man it looked fine.

Couldn’t justify the cost, not after snaring a signed Bernie Parent photo at an auction at the Air Canada Centre last season that now hangs proudly in my home office.  So, we turned our attention to the forgotten stepchild of the collectable industry…hockey cards.

Or in this case, a wonderful, jumbled assortment of hockey and baseball cards from the past thirty-five years.  Most were from the Glut Years; 1990 through to about 2000.  The years that almost killed my interest in the hobby, when everyone and their Mom thought that they’d get rich by purchasing a room full of Eric Lindros rookie cards and then stashing them away.

Didn’t work that way.  The vast majority of people who got into the sports card industy at that point were buying high..and later selling low.  Or just plain dumping them.

For once in my life, I was on the right end of a trend, having started collecting in 1973.  By the mid-90’s, I bought the odd hockey and baseball card set, and particular singles of players I followed, but that was the extent of my interest.  Now that my kid is at the age where he’s noticed sports cards, it’s reinvigorated my interest, and appreciation, for those colourful pieces of cardboard.

Yes, I’ve kept all of my cards from my childhood, and most of them are in fine shape.  I could probably get a good amount of cash for them, IF I chose to sell, and IF someone wanted to purchase them (always the big if in the equation), but I have no intention of doing that.  Those cards are a wonderful time tunnel back to simpler days, when all I cared about was what teams would do on the ice, not in late-night bars, or in the back of taxi cabs, or in courtrooms in Phoenix.

Plus, my kid has no idea that these things have any worth.  What does he know about economics, he thinks I’m a human money machine.  He’s interested in sports cards because they look cool, as he says.

We waded through the box of commons, looking for the Magnificent Seven, because the CNE special offered seven cards for five bucks.   That sounded like fun, though in truth, seven cards in this commons box added up would be lucky to break the two dollar mark in overall value.

Right away my son found a Pavel Bure card, in the beautiful away blue Rangers uniform, that he didn’t already have.  That was card number one, for after all, he thinks Bure still plays and the Russian Rocket is his favourite player.  The truth can wait for later.

Then he got all excited about a Tom Draper card.  Tom Draper?  Sorry, it’s not about the money, but dammit if I was going to spend more than five cents on a Draper card, especially when I have about a half-dozen at home.  We moved on.

Next, he stumbled upon a legends card with Milt Schmidt on it.  Seeing the Bruins logo, my kid’s face broke into a wide grin and he recited the words I whispered to him when he was still in his crib.  “Number Four, Bobby Orr”.

I dropped the Murray Bannerman card I was looking at (and already had), and took a look.  Could it be?

Naw.  It was Uncle Milty.  A nice find, but since it was a modern card, it wasn’t special enough to make our Magnificent Seven.

Next to that card was a Reg Leach from my favourite O-Pee-Chee/Topps set of all-time, the very colourful 71-72 set.  What a find!   No way the guy in the booth would cast aside a card from that set into his commons box.

And he didn’t.  It was a fine looking reprint that was part of the 2002 Topps Archive set.  Nonetheless, I don’t have all of the original 71-72 set, and seeing that the price for those babies has risen considerably, I never will.  This copy will suffice.  Also found a Peter McNab reprint (75-76) and a Mike Milbury reprint (78-79) that I already had as originals, but they looked so good just sitting there atop a motley collection of worthless computer-perfect modern cards, that I had to have them.

We now had four of our Magnificent Seven.

By now, my son had lost interest, and having located his Mom walking by, implored her to buy him ice cream.  Undaunted, I soldiered on.

Entry number five took me away from hockey; it was a simple, yet tasty Bill Gullickson card (1985) in his beautiful white Montreal Expos uniform.  Anything Expos I’d buy, heck, I’d buy the team if they’d let me.  Thought I already had this card, but just in case, I had to take this puppy home.

Card number six was also baseball.  Tom McCraw of the Cleveland Indians (1976), the Topps set the year before I started collecting baseball cards.  And this was no reprint.  This was the real deal.  Which doesn’t really mean anything, for who remembers Tom McCraw except the McCraw family, and die-hard White Sox fans?

Card number seven is where I genuinely got excited.  When I found it, I looked around in order to find someone to share my joy with.  Alas, I was surrounded by Philistines.  Where was Scott Laughlin when you needed him?  He would have understood.

For there in my hands, framed by an ungodly mix of purple and pink borders, looking sharp in his yellow-and-green Athletics uniform, was Herb Washington.

This is the guy that wacky old Charlie O. Finley signed to a contract to be a pinch runner.  A pinch runner.  Washington was a track star at Michigan State, and Finley signed him in 1974 only to pinch run.  Nothing else.  Just run.

Which he did.  During his brief two-year MLB career, Washington got into 105 games, stole 31 bases, and got caught stealing 17 times.  He scored 33 runs, which means to me this guy wasn’t able to take full advantage of his speed out there.  More to base stealing that running fast.  Worse, he got picked off second during a World Series game.

Still, this card was the only time Topps ever released a pinch runner card.  Had to have it.  I now have it.

Which got me to thinking, will we ever see a day when an NHL team carries a designated shooter?  Someone who’s awesome at the shootout, but would be a liability during the normal course of a game.  You’d only carry him on the bench to be that big stick come the skills competition.

One name leapt to mind – Jason Allison.  That dude was a pure goal scorer.  That dude also made me look good on skates.  He might be a perfect candidate for the role.  Does it specify anywhere in the NHL rulebook that a player has to wear skates on ice?  What about gumboots?  Maybe Allison could take the deciding shot in boots, or broomball shoes.

Maybe that’s why the Maple Leafs invited Allison to training camp.

It turns out Herb Washington has, or had, a hockey connection.  He was the owner of the Youngstown Steelhawks of the CHL, from 2005 to 2008.  The team folded after that, and Herb nows owns a number of McDonald’s franchises in Youngstown and Greenville, Pennsylvania.  Fast food for a fast guy.

Please say hi to him for me if you’re in the area.  Tell him I finally found his card.  Can’t wait for the Jason Allison DS card.

- Mick Kern

Mick Kern appears courtesy of Live From Wayne Gretzky’s