Some Radio Ramblings . .

Not as much time listening to sports radio this week as I would have liked, but I have a few things I thought I'd chat about for a little bit.


Team1040:

Lots of chatter on what a disaster the Kelly firing is for the NHL earlier in the week. During the afternoon hours I usually listen, it was like impending doom was going to fall on the NHL. And you know, I'll be honest. I didn't immediately think that, but with a league as seemingly fragile as ours, and let me think of a not to mean word - MORON - running it, it's hard to imagine anything is impossible. So I will just leave it as, I hope not. For the game we all love and for us in the states having seemingly no other option than the NHL, I hope not.

For the record, XM204 had similar sentiments as well. Scott Laughlin suggested it would have been best to dismantle the Players Association entirely - get all the people out of there that may be too comfortable or too involved - and start from scratch. Honestly...maybe that isn't such a bad idea.

♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦

A big topic, obviously, today, was the 12-year signing of Roberto Luongo. Now, I ask, has anyone learned yet? From Rick DiPietro's contract that he may never even play out. From Hossa's contract suddenly not looking so good in Chicago. I think any contract of that length, unless given to someone like Ovechkin, is nuts. I just do. And a goalie, there is even more of a risk to it. So much can change with a given team, and with the league on a whole. Heck, I hate the 7-year contracts the Rangers gave out. I don't want to be saddled with anyone for that long. Again, you make exceptions for the Crosby's and Ovechkin's but other than that...too long, just too damn long.

Team1040 was making fun of Canucks GM Mike Gillis for referencing Luongo in the same sentence with Johnny Bauer and Dominik Hasek. Those wouldn't have been my first choices, but - you can read his quotes here.

♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦


The rest of today's conversation was how Roberto Luongo differs from Trevor Linden or Marcus Naslund as Canucks Captain and how they the fans, the team, the ownership may be looking at Roberto as a savior of sorts. I think nothing but the highest of Trevor Linden. He was a fans player. A person truly devoted to the team, the city, and the people of British Columbia. He deserves every kind word he gets. They referenced this photo on air today; again, I didn't need to look it up. It is ingrained.



Naslund, they said, was loved when he was scoring, and certainly not beloved when he wasn't. He kept himself separate from the fans, not showing much emotion either way. Sound familiar Rangers fans? I always liked the guy because he was respected for doing his job and being a good person and player in this league. It's not easy to play hockey in Vancouver. He was a quiet-type person, who had a few remarkable years, a few not so remarkable ones, but who always led as a professional, in my memory. And despite his only being in NY one season, that is how I viewed him coming in, and that is how I will choose to remember him.

Roberto Luongo, they discussed, can be fickle at times - and they didn't mean on the ice. Sometimes he gives a lot, sometimes he closes off. Not at all untypical of a goalie. But when I think of Roberto Luongo, I think of a couple things. I think of a guy who was harassed for wanting to be with his wife when she was going through the end of a difficult pregnancy during the All-Star game a few years back, which I thought was a horrible thing for him to have to endure. And I think of a guy who was one of only two or three players that came to the locker room to speak to the media after they lost to Chicago in that game last spring (the Kane hat-trick game), and the guy who had to, subsequently, leave the room after he choked up in tears because he was so upset. I'll take a guy that cares that much any day.

There may not be a perfect leader. Or a perfect player. A perfect captain. And we'd certainly be hard pressed to find a perfect person. But, I'd like to think that pinning all hopes on one player is not the only way. You can look to them to lead, to be the best player they can be, to make their teammates better, and to care. And I think all three of them did that or can do that in their own right, and in their own time. I do.

I follow the Canucks when I can. I do wish them luck. While I'd never take back 1994, a tiny part of me always felt for Trevor Linden being on the wrong side of that. I hope, someday, they can get there too.

♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦


Team990:

Monday had a lot of chatter and what Tony called "the best 10 minutes of radio [he's] had in a long time."

They were talking Tom Cruise, Top Gun, reading, vocabulary, speeches, and whether or not PJ had gone to McKibbins (Irish Pub in la belle city for those of you not from MTL) before the show, as he kept screwing up John F Kennedy's "Country" speech. Apparently he bought a book of best American speeches and read that one the first night. And he had a really hard time saying "ask not what your country can do for you - ask what you can do for your country."

=)

I'm with Tony. That was fantastic radio.

♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦

In hockey related topics, two things we can elaborate on here.

I already posted on Twitter what PJ said: "Coaches are stuck with these players. Yes you want them to win, you want them to be successful...But you just don't have the talent to win." "I think everything falls on the GM"

Now, if you are a fan of the Rangers, you have got to be nodding your head. I said often enough last year that the Rangers, while not the utter train wreck that was the Canadiens, still paralleled that team a lot. Questionable decisions. Lacking passion from those supposed to lead the team. Questionable chemistry. The firing of a coach, but more questions for the GM. A lot was similar.

So, I thought about PJs comment. And, despite knowing - absolutely knowing - that Glen Sather can be blamed for a great portion of the Rangers ills, he simply cannot be blamed for them all.

He may have overspent unhealthy sums of money, over, and over, and over, and over again, on bringing in older, suckier, crappier, lazier crops of past-their-prime or never-had-a-prime athletes, yes.

And he might have done this without ever standing up for his decisions, or showing his face in public, prompting thoughts that he, much like a Meyer-esque vampire, could not go out on sunny days - or, well, frankly, on any types of days, yes.

And he might be still clinging desparately onto a status he gained by building a team of nothing out in Edmonton, in the model of a team like the Winnipeg Jets of the one-time WHA, while instead in his time in NY seems to be modeling the team's success after another local team of the same name.

*sigh* - where was I going with this again?

Okay, back on target. While Mr. Fischer-Price calculator and I-love-$7 million has his faults - many, many faults - last year's disaster can be blamed on two other groups just as easily:

The players themselves - and they know who they are - who refused to try, sometimes, seemingly at all to even be worth half of what they were being paid.

The coaching staff - finally and justifiably fired in February - who somehow continued to play the same horribly lazy and inefficent players in the same horrible and inefficient ways over, and over, and over, while perfectly good and hard-working players wasted away in street clothes, over, and over, and over...

Look. A new season is less than a month away. In fact one month tonight, the Rangers will open their season on the road. I will not spend tonight dwelling any more on the particulars than I already have.

BUT - yes, the GM has, as PJ suggested, every opportunity to wreck and disable a team by his poor choices. This is evidenced well in NY. But if these players tried just a bit harder; if the coach stopped trying to be so damn nice and tried to actually fix what could be fixed - I don't think it would have been as painful as it was. I just don't. Everyone is to blame. Some more than others, perhaps, but...

♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦

And lastly, to close, PJ speculated today on what had perhaps gone on in Ottawa. (The great mystery of them all!) He said that if you looked at Jason Spezza's wedding party - which we did, back when photos were first posted - you'd notice two familiar faces. Former Senators Ray Emery and Brian McGrattan stood up for their one time teammate.

Now PJ speculated that these might not have been the guys Ottawa would have deemed the most harmless, let's say. (That's my word, not his). But he said, perhaps, Spezza being young and impressionable, started hanging with particular company and got away from being focused on the game. Split groups. Tension arose in the lockerroom. Perhaps a divide among all the top players that we never knew for sure about.

Trust me, lots has been speculated about Ottawa, and whether Heatley talks or not, whether he moves teams or not, I'll always be curious. Curious how a team that went to the Final led by Ray Emery in 2007 and started the following year so hot, could fall from grace so horrifically by the end. And not only not recover, but fall further in such speculation of some greater evil than just bad ice hockey.

♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦

Just some things to think about with less than one month to go til the regular season opens...

I can't wait! =)

The Power Play on Sather. . .

Just a quick blog (I know! I know!) before I get to some more thoughts this week.

I'm driving home today and I'm listening to Rossi and Boomer on the Powerplay, XM204. And there was a list of bad free agency teams this season and the Rangers were #4.

The reasoning was hilarious though.

They (I'm saying they because I am actually not 100% sure who it was because I was in the car for so few minutes) said the hockey gods gave Sather a break for all his consistent stupidity. They gave him a break and they let Gainey do something stupid, so that Sather could get out of Gomez's contract.

He said, fans of the Rangers were like, yes, contract is gone, we are going to do it with youth.

And then bam, Sather gives $7.5 million a season right to Gaborik. And they were like, there he goes.

He likened it to Sather being like a drug addict. He tried to wait and he couldn't wait 24 hours with having $$ to spend. So he did.

And he said, fans of the Rangers, that is what they are stuck with. And he didn't mean Gaborik.

He meant Sather.

Hilarious.

I'll give my take later, just had to share that.

Yotes: Prucha Nets 1st. . .

Well it finally happened. Petr Prucha netted his first goal tonight...as a Coyote.

Not - as Terry Mercury incorrectly mentioned just a half an hour ago on XM204 Ice Cap - his first of the season.

He mentioned in the wake of Phoenix's 6-2 loss to Anaheim, that Prucha had just scored his 1st goal of the season and that if - if - Phoenix were to make the playoffs next year, they'd need a lot more production from Petr Prucha.

I have nothing wrong with people making mistakes. Goodness knows this blog has provided many examples of it. I just don't like when people make sweeping generalities without first knowing the facts.

Prucha scored, in limited games and ice time, four goals as a Ranger this season. That makes tonight's goal his first - as a Coyote. And fifth on the season.

I LOVE the Ice Cap guys; next to Hockey This Morning,it's my favorite show on XM. So it's nothing personal. Even though Mercury was a fill in for Jamie Shalley tonight. I will not play favorites. I just didn't like that not only was he incorrect in his reporting, but he used his incorrect fact to try to make a point about why the Phoenix team wasn't doing so well this year.

Sure, Petr Prucha affected the Coyotes downfall, from midtown Manhattan.

Can't this guy get a break from anyone?

And just who gave Terry Mercury Tom Renney's cell phone number, anyway.

;)

Now that I've gotten the jokes out of my system, here is the video of his Petr Prucha's 1st goal - as a Coyote.

Have I clarified enough? ;)

It was, let me say, quite a nice goal.


(Note, I am including the full game recap, because I can't get 'just' the goal right now. Sounds like Prucha had a few decent chances tonight. I haven't watched the game yet, as I was at the Garden tonight.)



And since tonight at NHTP, we are talking only about my favorite departed Ranger, here is one of the good quotes from Darren Pang from Tuesday's game against San Jose. Prucha was put on a line with Martin Hanzal for the game to try to get something from their "Czech familiarity."

"Both guys are really good on the defensive side of the puck and they will see a lot of Joe Thornton in this game. When you look at Petr Prucha, if you are unaware of him, he's a player that, only three years ago, scored 30 goals in the National Hockey League, so he can finish. His goal production has dropped, but he's tenacious on the puck, strong in the corners. He takes a hit and he gets up. He plays a very disciplined game. He doesn't get out of sorts if he gets banged around a little bit. That's what I like about Petr Prucha. And I think he's really familiarizing himself with the Phoenix fans and with his locker room."

Even though I haven't spent nearly as much as I would like to watching and soaking up all of the Phoenix games, from day one Darren Pang has said nothing but wonderful things about Petr. His attitude, work ethic, and style of play. I find it hard to believe if those things stay the same, that he will not be a fan favorite in Phoenix if he stays in the desert.

I also, of course, find it hard to believe that those things we love about Prucha will not stay the same.

Heart, spirit, loyalty, skill.

That was and will remain the Petr Prucha trademark.

Does it really all add up, Rangers Fans. . .?

It’s been a week. Okay, it’s been more than a week. So why not throw a few random thoughts out there? Get me, umm you, through a lazy Thursday morning where I, err I mean you, can’t seem to get motivated. Great. Here we go. . .

In the last “more than a week” there’s been a lot of talk on XM204 about moves teams made, moves teams didn’t make, good, bad, or indifferent. Now, I remember listening to The Power Play on last Tuesday I believe, and they were having a conversation about the New York Rangers. *sigh* As a Rangers fan, it didn’t sound good. But, as a Rangers fan, I can’t say that I disagree with much they said. The hosts said that they didn’t know what to think of the Rangers. They didn’t see much sense with the Wade Redden deal (see below). And overall they were not sure WHY this team seriously overspent for so many players last year and again this year, which inevitably only serves to tie up A LOT of cap money. Because honestly it’s not an issue of will this team mesh, will the plan (or lack thereof) work? And goodness knows that I am hoping with all my heart that Marcus Naslund wakes up and thinks it is 2002, that whoever the heck is on the point on the power play actually shoots the puck (at the net!), that the young guys get a chance to play, that Hank Lundqvist gets his consistency going early and often, and that either (and hopefully both) Chris Drury and Scott Gomez make Rangers fans say, yes, damn, now that’s why we got that guy. But rather, it’s merely an issue of basic mathematics.

And before I continue, I must say that even though I’m better than average at math, I am not the type of fan who sits there calculating the room their team is under the cap (or over the cap) and how many (and which) players would have to be moved to make adequate cap space for [fill in the blank]. I can’t. Seriously, it seems like too much work for me that might not yield much satisfaction in the end. Sometimes I’ll try to read someone else’s take on the matter if they’ve showed interest in doing the math and write it out for all to see, but when my head starts to hurt I’ll just stop reading.

But what I can tell you, as a basic, basic math lesson, is that the numbers don’t add up in NY. When the cap is set at around 57 million ($56.7 to be exact), and you have three guys each making around $7 million (Hank about 6.8, and Gomez and Drury both over 7), that is around $21 million – which is around 37% of your total cap room. Add Wade Redden’s 6.5 million (which, mathematicians, yes, yes, is close to 7, very good!) to the mix, and you now have those four players making close to $28 million of your salary – which is (wait for it, wait for it) – 49% of your total to spend. And once again, mathematicians, come on now, don’t let me down – yes! yes, 49 is just a hair under 50. Which is half! The New York Rangers have four players (4 players!) on their roster being paid almost, just about, essentially, when it comes right down to it pretty much half of their total allotted money. And no, no, Wayne Gretzky is not one of them. Neither are Mark Messier, Bobby Orr, Maurice Richard, Gordie Howe, or Mario Lemieux in their best days. They are Scott Gomez, Chris Drury, Wade Redden, and Henrik Lundqvist. Now, I’m not taking a swipe at Hank. (haha, who during Tuesday’s show either Jim Tatti, Gary Green, or Mike Ross called Henrik Lundstrom on air. It was pretty hilarious. Who’s Lundstrom? Seriously. Maybe the Rangers can sign him too!) Lundqvist has been nominated for a Vezina in his first three years, had 10 shutouts last season, and won a gold medal for his country two years ago. For all honesty, he is not the argument here. NY has a great goalie in him, one that will hopefully only get better, and you have to pay your goalie to keep him in town. All teams need that one big franchise goalie to carry the team in order to be successful. But Chris Drury, whos Mr. Clutch routine Rangers fans have seen more of from the wrong side (cue game 5 of the 2007 Eastern Semi finals), Scott Gomez, who can be good, but is not, not, not, not supposed to be any teams top $ maker, and Wade Redden, the guy who EVERYONE even HIMSELF agreed would be and should be taking a pay cut this year after a abysmal year last year – they are all making close to, if not exceeding $7 million dollars. They are NOT worth it. End of story.

Now one can argue – what does it matter? What if the team plays perfectly this year, is competitive, and performs up to and beyond all expectations. But honestly, the odds of that are? The odds are better that the team will not play perfectly, let’s not kid ourselves. But that’s not even the issue. The issue is how much money they have tied up for how many years! Hank’s was a six year deal. Drury’s was for five. Redden’s is 6. And Gomez’s was for 7! That is a lot of money over a long period of time. So, the point is, the Rangers have handicapped themselves not only for this year, but for at least the next four or five years to come. And that is what concerns me more. I’m concerned in general (for Rangers fans that’s part of the deal), but I’m REALLY concerned about that. $7 x 4 = $28 million. $28 = $56.7/2. Which all equals the fact that the Rangers are screwed!!! Mathematics lesson over, kids.

Some boring (even to me) but quick hits. . .

-I swear, you take a week off writing a blog, turn on morning radio, and all of a sudden the Kings are relocating to Kansas City? But yet I can’t find anything about this. Was this a joke? Seriously, someone clue me in. I don’t think Kansas City appreciated what they had (and goodness knows they could have cared less about the train wreck that is the Royals – although they have pretty blue uniforms!) so why they should get a team is already something I don’t quite understand. But LA. LA is going to be good. Really good I hope. LA is the foundation that Gretzky built in the States. The Kings can’t move. Can they? Did someone just start speculating because the Kings and Blues are playing a pre-season game there in a couple months? Did I hear it all wrong? In the early morning or late afternoon, that is very possible.

-Mark Parrish was bought out in Minnesota. Apparently the team was trying to make it seem as if it was not personal. But, how can they say that when they knew their cap situation in advance, and they just recently brought in Owen Nolan for approximately the same amount of money as Parrish was making (all according to XM204). So if they knew their cap situation at all, which one would hope as a professional ice hockey team that they did, they apparently did have a choice on which player they wanted. So how is that not personal?

-The Sundin debate that has raged on and on, and on and on, finally ends tomorrow. Or does it?

More on that tomorrow, I’m sure. Even though rumors are swirling that even five or six teams (still including the NYRs) are in the mix, I’ll stick to Vancouver and Montreal being the front runners. And if he wants to stay East more than he wants the money (which of course is a BIG IF), my money is on Montreal. Stay tuned.

Class dismissed.