At the quarter-season marker for the season, it’s time to take a look around and re-align some expectations for certain players and the types of seasons they are about to have. Some of these players will be goal scorers, others are goal stoppers, while others are more known (or not YET recognized) for their passing capabilities. Some of them are highly lauded, while others tend to be overlooked.
These are the top ten(for one reason, or another) players in NHL right now:
10. PATRICK KANE - Surprisingly, Patrick Kane is the real deal. No, I'm not surprised because he's American. And not because he floats when he doesn't have the puck. I say that because he looks like he's 14 and he's playing in a league with big, mean men. His stats claim that he is 5'9'', 160 lbs but unless he weighed in immediately after attending a BALCO summer camp, there is no way that is true. He has avoided a sophomore slump, unlike his esteemed colleague and captain Jonathan Toews, and he might turn out to be the true star of the two. And more importantly, he has avoided being hammered by anybody bigger than him (read: everybody). He has a steady touch around the net and has shown good hands. To keep developing his play, he will need to contribute more defensively but as of now, he's a pure-scorer who is doing just that. A lot. He should be a shoo-in for the 2010 American Hockey Team. I’m just waiting for Deion Phaneuf to catch him by surprise with a hit to see how resilient he can be.
9. MATT STAJAN – Speaking of the 2010 Olympics, I’ll move onto some more sure-fire picks - right after I discuss Matt Stajan: He summarizes everything that is going right under Ron Wilson’s guidance. He has always been a hard worker, in order to compensate for his offensive deficiencies. But this month, he has exploded for 14 points and leads the Maple Leafs with 20 points in 20 games. While Stajan has always been a very consistent player, I’d be the most surprised person if he finishes the season with 82 points. However, he is still on pace for one of those inexplicable “career years” that occur occasionally. Just ask Jason Blake, he knows all about them. This year, with his increased responsibility on the 1st line, he is seeing the ice very well, he is able to make passes through traffic onto a teammate’s stick, and he is finally finishing on his opportunities around the net (which he gets a lot of, due to his big hustle). Enjoy it while it lasts, Leaf fans.
8. ALES HEMSKY – I feel I understood Ales Hemsky better after having watched him play in the 2006 Stanley Cup Finals against the Hurricanes. On a powerplay, he skated with the puck for at least 30 seconds straight, neither passing nor shooting, just deke-ing through everybody who decided to pressure him. The fans, exasperated, began to yell their two-cent opinions until the entire rink was in a frenzy. While Hemsky has clearly had this huge upside just waiting to come out, it seems he has pegged the 2008-09 season as the one to show what he can do. Regardless of his production at the end of the season (career-high 77, thus far), I always was vaguely disappointed when it came to Hemsky because I had the odd sensation that he could get 120 or 130 points. With 14 points in November, Hemsky is finally averaging a point-per-game on the season (21 pts, 20 games), he is on pace to have a minor breakout season.
7. RYAN GETZLAF – While Brian Burke may never get over the perceived slight he suffered at the hands of Kevin Lowe, he can rest assured that Lowe picked the wrong player. Or the fact that he is no longer managing the Ducks, so it doesn’t matter anymore. When the Oilers GM signed away one of the Ducks’ top prospects, Dustin Penner, using a Restricted Free Agent Offer-Sheet, Mt. Burke, which had been dormant for some time, nearly exploded. At any rate, the Ducks are certainly glad that Lowe signed Penner (4 G, 1 A over 18 games) instead of their young-star Getzlaf (8 G, 19 A over 22 games). Getzlaf is big, mobile, can fight or score. He’s a punishing player, a 2008 version of the Todd Bertuzzi we will never see again (a dubious compliment, perhaps, but a compliment all the same). He’s fun to watch and he’s passionate; on the other hand, he is ugly on a scale that rivals Milan Lucic. He should be another player to keep an eye on during the 2010 Team Canada selection process.
6. DEVIN SETOGUCHI – Who? Exactly. Devin Setoguchi is a rookie forward playing on the same line as a surging Patrick Marleau and Joe Thornton. While the guidance of two of the best players in the league playing on your line (including the league’s best passer in Thornton), would certainly help, Setoguchi is creating plenty of his own scoring chances, as he sits tied with Marleau at 24 points. Setoguchi has 12 goals and 12 assists, showing a remarkably balanced skill-set. On the strength of their top line, as well as some journeymen defensemen having career years (see: Ehrhoff, Christian) and the Sharks are 17-3-1.
5. MARC SAVARD – Perhaps one of the most underrated players in the league, Marc Savard is again quietly putting together another terrific season. In every post-lockout season, Savard has averaged over a point-per-game. In 2 of the last 3 seasons, he has 95+ points, (as well as close to 100 PIMs in each). While his numbers have been impressive, he doesn’t demand attention in the same way that Alex Ovechkin or Sidney Crosby do, so he’s often overlooked. But with the recent resurgence in the Bruins’ play, Savard is finally getting the recognition he deserves. He was named to his 1st All-Star game in 2008 and should be getting further attention from Team Canada for the 2010 Vancouver Olympics.
4. EVGENI MALKIN – Ovechkin’s Russian brethren, Evgeni Malkin and AO don’t necessarily see eye-to-eye on everything. They’ve taken the on-ice NHL rivalry to the point where I’m not sure they can be Olympic roommates anymore. Regardless of their feelings toward each other, both are playing some good hockey. Malkin leads the league with 31 points, but is closely trailed by Ovechkin’s Crosby-hating teammate Alexander Semin (27), among others. Most importantly, Malkin is outshining his perhaps better known teammate Sidney Crosby and proving that, even if Sid the Kid is struggling a bit, Gino has to be reckoned with on his own.
3. SIMON GAGNE - While having him on your favourite team or fantasy team is always questionable because of his health, Simon Gagne has made a case for himself to be considered the next coming of Yzerman. He has rebounded from an injury-shortened campaign last year and caught fire. He has 15 points in November, and is tied for 2nd in the NHL with 27 points. As long as he can stay healthy all season, he will remain a threat to win the NHL scoring race.
2. ROBERTO LUONGO – Robbie Lu has really stepped it up this season. What the Canucks lack in offensive depth, they make up for in net. Luongo enables the Sedin brothers and Pavol Demitra to get whatever offense they can, without having to worry too much about the defensive side. If a team has a goaltender they trust, that allows them to take more offensive risks than they would if they had Curtis Joseph in net. Over the span of 19 games, Luongo has 5 shutouts and allows only 2.2 goals per game. Prior to his injury, he was on pace for 20 shutouts. While those stats are inflated because of how early in the season it is, it shows that he had a realistic chance to beat Tony Esposito’s 1969 record of 15. Here’s hoping Luongo can heal from his groin injury quickly and that the Canucks can keep themselves in the playoff hunt without him.
1. ALEX OVECHKIN – Alex Ovechkin had a pedestrian October, as his mind was not entirely on hockey with some family matters going on back in Russia. He has 20 points this month, 4 more than anybody else in the league. #2 in November? That’s none other than Ovechkin’s linemate Nicklas Backstrom, who has 16 points. (Not to be confused with Niklas Backstrom.) While Backstrom and Alexander Semin are both having great seasons on their own, there is no debate as to who is the Top Dog in town. These guys are primed for a repeat trip to the playoffs and I will not be surprised if they do some barnstorming once they’re there.
Wednesday, November 26, 2008
Tuesday, November 11, 2008
Poker on ESPN - A Referendum
I’m sorry, Poker, but I’ve held my silence for too long. While you may have a “World Series,” I have been curious as to why ESPN and TSN cover your events. I am here to make my arguments against your inclusion on the “Worldwide Leader in Sports” television network, because let’s face it, Poker. You just aren’t a sport.
According to Webster’s dictionary, a sport was defined as “1. A source of diversion: PASTIME”. In the 19th century, sporting newspapers would cover horse racing, boxing and baseball. However, they would also make note of the happenings in burlesque, music halls and vaudeville. By Mr. Daniel Webster’s definition, just about anything can be a sport. Scrabble, while an enjoyable pastime, is not a sport. Other sources of diversion that aren’t sports include singing, reading, and watching television.
By nature of what can be included in Webster’s archaic definition, we clearly need to redefine “sport”. Because as enjoyable as playing Hungry Hungry Hippos may be – it isn’t a sport.
Traditionally accepted sports include boxing, football, baseball, hockey, basketball, tennis, golf, and anything found at the Olympics. They all include elements of competition, physical exertion, and demand intense focus. In fact, I would argue that in order for an activity to be a sport, they must have all three of these elements.
A heated debate over the years has been regarding Nascar’s inclusion in the term “sport”. A quote attributed to Ernest Hemingway says: “There are only three sports: bullfighting, motor racing and mountaineering, all the others being games.” By my definition, Nascar is definitely a sport: while the engine does most of the work, drivers toil in 140 degree cockpits, sweating off ten pounds of water throughout the course of a race. They must maintain an intense focus for up to 4 hours, covering 500 miles of ground at speeds that most of us have only traveled on commercial airliners. The consequences of losing that focus are potentially disastrous. Anybody who has witnessed a Nascar race on television cannot question its level of competition. While Nascar drivers probably aren’t “athletes” per-se, they are definitely “sportsmen”.
Mountaineers could be also called “sportsmen”. What Hemingway liked about auto racing, mountaineering and bullfighting was the passion it required to look death in the eye and to choose to participate in that activity. These events are essentially struggles for survival between man and The Great Beyond – man’s decisions in the arena of those sports were tantamount to the decision between life and death. In the spirit of Hemingway’s quote, I am prepared to invite bow hunters and fishermen into the Club of Sports. There is a physical degree of difficulty that is included in pulling a 220 lb halibut from the sea. And there is no question that a life-and-death struggle is competitive and demands focus, whether it is man vs. man or man vs. beast.
Using the same criterion, let’s examine poker: It is undoubtedly competitive. I can’t imagine anything more cutthroat than a hundred men clamoring for several million dollars. Poker demands an intense amount of focus. One bad hand can spell disaster for a someone’s chances of winning “The World Series of Poker”. But the thing that trips me up is the degree of physical exertion. There just isn’t any. Sure, in the heat of the moment, a poker player might break a sweat. Mick Jagger sweats during his concerts; however, being a Rolling Stone is not a sport.
Poker – you’re close. You require focus and are very competitive. But two out of three doesn’t make you a sport. It leaves you in the “games” category. There is no shame in being grouped with Candyland, Halo, and Tic-Tac-Toe. They are all worthy peers. But in comparison to the potential for physical devastation in boxing, football, and hockey – real sports – you are just fun and games.
According to Webster’s dictionary, a sport was defined as “1. A source of diversion: PASTIME”. In the 19th century, sporting newspapers would cover horse racing, boxing and baseball. However, they would also make note of the happenings in burlesque, music halls and vaudeville. By Mr. Daniel Webster’s definition, just about anything can be a sport. Scrabble, while an enjoyable pastime, is not a sport. Other sources of diversion that aren’t sports include singing, reading, and watching television.
By nature of what can be included in Webster’s archaic definition, we clearly need to redefine “sport”. Because as enjoyable as playing Hungry Hungry Hippos may be – it isn’t a sport.
Traditionally accepted sports include boxing, football, baseball, hockey, basketball, tennis, golf, and anything found at the Olympics. They all include elements of competition, physical exertion, and demand intense focus. In fact, I would argue that in order for an activity to be a sport, they must have all three of these elements.
A heated debate over the years has been regarding Nascar’s inclusion in the term “sport”. A quote attributed to Ernest Hemingway says: “There are only three sports: bullfighting, motor racing and mountaineering, all the others being games.” By my definition, Nascar is definitely a sport: while the engine does most of the work, drivers toil in 140 degree cockpits, sweating off ten pounds of water throughout the course of a race. They must maintain an intense focus for up to 4 hours, covering 500 miles of ground at speeds that most of us have only traveled on commercial airliners. The consequences of losing that focus are potentially disastrous. Anybody who has witnessed a Nascar race on television cannot question its level of competition. While Nascar drivers probably aren’t “athletes” per-se, they are definitely “sportsmen”.
Mountaineers could be also called “sportsmen”. What Hemingway liked about auto racing, mountaineering and bullfighting was the passion it required to look death in the eye and to choose to participate in that activity. These events are essentially struggles for survival between man and The Great Beyond – man’s decisions in the arena of those sports were tantamount to the decision between life and death. In the spirit of Hemingway’s quote, I am prepared to invite bow hunters and fishermen into the Club of Sports. There is a physical degree of difficulty that is included in pulling a 220 lb halibut from the sea. And there is no question that a life-and-death struggle is competitive and demands focus, whether it is man vs. man or man vs. beast.
Using the same criterion, let’s examine poker: It is undoubtedly competitive. I can’t imagine anything more cutthroat than a hundred men clamoring for several million dollars. Poker demands an intense amount of focus. One bad hand can spell disaster for a someone’s chances of winning “The World Series of Poker”. But the thing that trips me up is the degree of physical exertion. There just isn’t any. Sure, in the heat of the moment, a poker player might break a sweat. Mick Jagger sweats during his concerts; however, being a Rolling Stone is not a sport.
Poker – you’re close. You require focus and are very competitive. But two out of three doesn’t make you a sport. It leaves you in the “games” category. There is no shame in being grouped with Candyland, Halo, and Tic-Tac-Toe. They are all worthy peers. But in comparison to the potential for physical devastation in boxing, football, and hockey – real sports – you are just fun and games.
Wednesday, October 29, 2008
"Mats... We Need To Talk..."
The four words anybody who is blissfully in love never wants to hear from their partner. But they are words Cliff Fletcher needs to practice in the mirror over the next few weeks, as former Maple Leafs captain Mats Sundin works off the results of a restful summer back in Sweden.
Because as Mats was enjoying his summer deciding whether or not he had the emotional fortitude to wear the Blue and White (or any other colours) this winter, we have been moving on. Ok - we haven't REALLY been moving on. But that's what we have been telling ourselves.
Over the past 4 years, Leafs Nation was held captive by John Ferguson, Junior. During this time, the Front Street Faithful could trust Mats would come through. He always has. Like an old sweatshirt worked in by a loved one, we got comfortable with #13. And he got comfortable with us. We were spending every Saturday night on the couch together, watching movies and eating popcorn, while those poor, pitiful teams like Carolina had one-month flings and embarrassing trysts with All-Stars for their inevitable playoff pushes. We had our star. And we didn't have eyes for anybody else.
- The Future -
But when Ferguson was shown the door, the focus changed in Leafs Land. Leaf fans no longer held onto any pipe dreams of making the playoffs. We wanted a contender, but we had to do it right. In the post-salary cap era, there is no other way to improve than through The Draft.
That's when things began to sour with Sundin. As he put us on his back in the Spring of 2008, our perception of #13 was different. Like a relationship taking a turn for the worse, it started with insensitive jokes. Fans knew that Sundin was going to put the Maple Leafs on his back, but this time we didn't want the ride. We wanted Steven Stamkos. We wanted to be young again.
When he refused to lose and made every Leafs fan believe, even if for just a moment, that we could make the unlikely post-season rush, Sundin was doing what he had done every other year. And we loved him for it. But it wasn't the same. There was the embarrassing trade-deadline squabble when he refused to be rented out and go for a Playoff Run with a contender.
We looked toward the end of the season as a time when both Mats and Leaf fans could regroup. We would have some time apart. Take a break. See if we felt the same way in the fall.
- The Split -
And, surprisingly, we did feel the same way. We still needed time away from Sundin. It hurt, but the season began respectably under new coach Ron Wilson. We upended the Red Wings in the 1st game of the season. So far, so good. We had Mats at the back of our minds, but our first forays out on Saturday nights went alright without him. We got shot down a few times, but this was expected. We were back in the game and it was exciting.
As the air grows colder and we ready ourselves for a long winter, we remember Mats fondly. Like a fresh break-up, both parties are lonely and unfulfilled. It's late at night and Mats is lying awake in bed, thinking about the good times. So he picks up the phone and scrolls down the phonebook to "M". Maple Leafs.
And Leafs fans are doing the same. We're lying in bed with all kinds of new jerseys... not just #13. So when we see our phone ringing at 3:00 am, and Niklas Hagman asks "Who's calling at this hour?" We answer, "Just an old friend." You don't want to rock the boat and shake Hagman, Nik Antropov and Alex Ponikarovsky's fragile confidence. They're performing just fine.
We tell ourselves that we're over Mats. But the truth is: we're not. Ron Wilson's coaching has allowed us to retain some shreds of dignity, but we won't be able to truly smile with joy until we feel the butterflies of a new leader - the same type of butterflies we'd get in our stomachs when we'd see Sundin rush down the ice on a 2-on-1 in April and you just knew he was going to score.
- The One Who Got Away -
We will find out what our future holds in December when Brian Burke replies to the Ducks about his contract extension offer. Henry Samueli has made it clear he wants Brian Burke to stick around, but Burke is tempted by the Thrill of the Chase he would feel as the General Manager of the Toronto Maple Leafs.
The time is right: Things haven't felt the same for Burkie in Anaheim. They had very high highs, and some equally low lows. It might just be time.
The reasons are right: Burke's family lives on the East Coast and he has made it clear that the cross-continental trips to visit them are difficult; his wife would be able to work in Toronto; and it is the highest profile job in the biggest hockey city on earth.
Fletcher and Leafs Nation are getting dolled up to make Burke an offer he can't refuse. Until we have "The Talk" with Burke, we aren't really going to be able to get over Mats. When we get those late-night phone calls, we will be tempted to answer even though we know it's wrong. But with Burke in town, it will be easier to see Mats with another team.
And that is precisely what Mats should do - we are trying to move on; he needs to do the same. He should sign with one of those younger, better-looking hockey teams that are currently vying for the Stanley Cup. Sure, he won't feel as emotionally connected to his team and his new fans. It will be really awkward when he first encounters the Leafs on the ice. He might even be thinking about us when he's lacing up his skates.
But when he lifts that Cup above his head, he will be enjoying the moment. It won't matter what jersey he is wearing. He will have earned what he has worked for his entire life.
We will always have fond memories, Mats. But it's time to move on.
Because as Mats was enjoying his summer deciding whether or not he had the emotional fortitude to wear the Blue and White (or any other colours) this winter, we have been moving on. Ok - we haven't REALLY been moving on. But that's what we have been telling ourselves.
Over the past 4 years, Leafs Nation was held captive by John Ferguson, Junior. During this time, the Front Street Faithful could trust Mats would come through. He always has. Like an old sweatshirt worked in by a loved one, we got comfortable with #13. And he got comfortable with us. We were spending every Saturday night on the couch together, watching movies and eating popcorn, while those poor, pitiful teams like Carolina had one-month flings and embarrassing trysts with All-Stars for their inevitable playoff pushes. We had our star. And we didn't have eyes for anybody else.
- The Future -
But when Ferguson was shown the door, the focus changed in Leafs Land. Leaf fans no longer held onto any pipe dreams of making the playoffs. We wanted a contender, but we had to do it right. In the post-salary cap era, there is no other way to improve than through The Draft.
That's when things began to sour with Sundin. As he put us on his back in the Spring of 2008, our perception of #13 was different. Like a relationship taking a turn for the worse, it started with insensitive jokes. Fans knew that Sundin was going to put the Maple Leafs on his back, but this time we didn't want the ride. We wanted Steven Stamkos. We wanted to be young again.
When he refused to lose and made every Leafs fan believe, even if for just a moment, that we could make the unlikely post-season rush, Sundin was doing what he had done every other year. And we loved him for it. But it wasn't the same. There was the embarrassing trade-deadline squabble when he refused to be rented out and go for a Playoff Run with a contender.
We looked toward the end of the season as a time when both Mats and Leaf fans could regroup. We would have some time apart. Take a break. See if we felt the same way in the fall.
- The Split -
And, surprisingly, we did feel the same way. We still needed time away from Sundin. It hurt, but the season began respectably under new coach Ron Wilson. We upended the Red Wings in the 1st game of the season. So far, so good. We had Mats at the back of our minds, but our first forays out on Saturday nights went alright without him. We got shot down a few times, but this was expected. We were back in the game and it was exciting.
As the air grows colder and we ready ourselves for a long winter, we remember Mats fondly. Like a fresh break-up, both parties are lonely and unfulfilled. It's late at night and Mats is lying awake in bed, thinking about the good times. So he picks up the phone and scrolls down the phonebook to "M". Maple Leafs.
And Leafs fans are doing the same. We're lying in bed with all kinds of new jerseys... not just #13. So when we see our phone ringing at 3:00 am, and Niklas Hagman asks "Who's calling at this hour?" We answer, "Just an old friend." You don't want to rock the boat and shake Hagman, Nik Antropov and Alex Ponikarovsky's fragile confidence. They're performing just fine.
We tell ourselves that we're over Mats. But the truth is: we're not. Ron Wilson's coaching has allowed us to retain some shreds of dignity, but we won't be able to truly smile with joy until we feel the butterflies of a new leader - the same type of butterflies we'd get in our stomachs when we'd see Sundin rush down the ice on a 2-on-1 in April and you just knew he was going to score.
- The One Who Got Away -
We will find out what our future holds in December when Brian Burke replies to the Ducks about his contract extension offer. Henry Samueli has made it clear he wants Brian Burke to stick around, but Burke is tempted by the Thrill of the Chase he would feel as the General Manager of the Toronto Maple Leafs.
The time is right: Things haven't felt the same for Burkie in Anaheim. They had very high highs, and some equally low lows. It might just be time.
The reasons are right: Burke's family lives on the East Coast and he has made it clear that the cross-continental trips to visit them are difficult; his wife would be able to work in Toronto; and it is the highest profile job in the biggest hockey city on earth.
Fletcher and Leafs Nation are getting dolled up to make Burke an offer he can't refuse. Until we have "The Talk" with Burke, we aren't really going to be able to get over Mats. When we get those late-night phone calls, we will be tempted to answer even though we know it's wrong. But with Burke in town, it will be easier to see Mats with another team.
And that is precisely what Mats should do - we are trying to move on; he needs to do the same. He should sign with one of those younger, better-looking hockey teams that are currently vying for the Stanley Cup. Sure, he won't feel as emotionally connected to his team and his new fans. It will be really awkward when he first encounters the Leafs on the ice. He might even be thinking about us when he's lacing up his skates.
But when he lifts that Cup above his head, he will be enjoying the moment. It won't matter what jersey he is wearing. He will have earned what he has worked for his entire life.
We will always have fond memories, Mats. But it's time to move on.
Elyse Hopfner-Hibbs: Successes Already Achieved - and Challenges That Lie In The Future
On the off-chance that you like reading old news, this is a profile of a Canadian gymnast I did in May, 2008.
Prior to last week’s World Cup event in Tianjin, China, Canadian gymnast Elyse Hopfner-Hibbs explained that she went there with one thing in mind – preparing for Beijing. Because of the magnitude of an Olympic experience, Coaches Carol-Angela Orchard and Brian McVey wanted Ms. Hopfner-Hibbs to have some event experience in China.
If it seems premature to be focusing on the Olympics before she is even able to qualify, Coach Orchard clarifies that she has been preparing for this for the past nine years. “Since she was 10. She was the novice champion of Canada when she was 10 and it’s a matter of building on that constantly.” The two women to represent Canada in Beijing will be selected at the National Championships in Calgary, from June 1-8.
The amount of preparation required places a tremendous amount of pressure on Ms. Hopfner-Hibbs. “The psychological aspect is now probably the most important thing for Elyse. We are dealing more with the psychological aspect of dealing with the pressure of an Olympic Games, which is huge.”
Orchard is no stranger to the Olympics. She has trained three former Olympians, including Canadians Monica Covacci and Michelle Conway. “On paper, (Hopfner-Hibbs) is superior to any gymnast that we have ever had in Canada – she has accomplished things nobody else has ever done. She has shattered that glass ceiling, so now little kids think, ‘a Canadian can do it.’”
Despite her lack of Olympic experience, Hopfner-Hibbs leads Canadian women with several firsts for the program. She was the first Canadian woman to medal at a World Championships – she won bronze on the balance beam in 2007. She was the first Canadian woman to win a gold medal at a World Cup event. Until April, Canadian women had won 5 medals at World Cup events – four of those belong to Ms. Hopfner-Hibbs.
Last week, on her first ever trip to China, she won her 3rd World Cup medal of the year on the uneven bars – a silver, following a gold medal won in Maribor, Czech Republic and a bronze from Dohar, Qatar. She says that her international success gives her confidence leading up to the Olympic qualifications. “My name has gotten out there, which is important in a judged sport. The judges have seen me and have responded to my routine, so it gives you confidence to know that you are able to compete with the best.”
Orchard says she is well prepared, but is quick to point out that the pressure of the Olympics changes the competition. For an uneven bars and balance-beam specialist such as Hopfner-Hibbs, it all depends on how she performs from moment-to-moment. “Her routines are definitely comparable. She could definitely make a final. And once you’re in the final, anything can happen, especially on beam.”
Following the Olympics, Hopfner-Hibbs will reap the benefits of her past decade of hard work – she will enroll as a student at University of California – Los Angeles in August, where she will be on a full scholarship for gymnastics. She isn’t sure what she wants to study. “I’ve changed my mind so many times… I’m just going to go and see what I like best,” she gushes, suddenly an excited 18-year-old. Following a brief pause, she catches herself and looks again like the professional she has been for the past decade. “But that’s all for after the Olympics.”
Prior to last week’s World Cup event in Tianjin, China, Canadian gymnast Elyse Hopfner-Hibbs explained that she went there with one thing in mind – preparing for Beijing. Because of the magnitude of an Olympic experience, Coaches Carol-Angela Orchard and Brian McVey wanted Ms. Hopfner-Hibbs to have some event experience in China.
If it seems premature to be focusing on the Olympics before she is even able to qualify, Coach Orchard clarifies that she has been preparing for this for the past nine years. “Since she was 10. She was the novice champion of Canada when she was 10 and it’s a matter of building on that constantly.” The two women to represent Canada in Beijing will be selected at the National Championships in Calgary, from June 1-8.
The amount of preparation required places a tremendous amount of pressure on Ms. Hopfner-Hibbs. “The psychological aspect is now probably the most important thing for Elyse. We are dealing more with the psychological aspect of dealing with the pressure of an Olympic Games, which is huge.”
Orchard is no stranger to the Olympics. She has trained three former Olympians, including Canadians Monica Covacci and Michelle Conway. “On paper, (Hopfner-Hibbs) is superior to any gymnast that we have ever had in Canada – she has accomplished things nobody else has ever done. She has shattered that glass ceiling, so now little kids think, ‘a Canadian can do it.’”
Despite her lack of Olympic experience, Hopfner-Hibbs leads Canadian women with several firsts for the program. She was the first Canadian woman to medal at a World Championships – she won bronze on the balance beam in 2007. She was the first Canadian woman to win a gold medal at a World Cup event. Until April, Canadian women had won 5 medals at World Cup events – four of those belong to Ms. Hopfner-Hibbs.
Last week, on her first ever trip to China, she won her 3rd World Cup medal of the year on the uneven bars – a silver, following a gold medal won in Maribor, Czech Republic and a bronze from Dohar, Qatar. She says that her international success gives her confidence leading up to the Olympic qualifications. “My name has gotten out there, which is important in a judged sport. The judges have seen me and have responded to my routine, so it gives you confidence to know that you are able to compete with the best.”
Orchard says she is well prepared, but is quick to point out that the pressure of the Olympics changes the competition. For an uneven bars and balance-beam specialist such as Hopfner-Hibbs, it all depends on how she performs from moment-to-moment. “Her routines are definitely comparable. She could definitely make a final. And once you’re in the final, anything can happen, especially on beam.”
Following the Olympics, Hopfner-Hibbs will reap the benefits of her past decade of hard work – she will enroll as a student at University of California – Los Angeles in August, where she will be on a full scholarship for gymnastics. She isn’t sure what she wants to study. “I’ve changed my mind so many times… I’m just going to go and see what I like best,” she gushes, suddenly an excited 18-year-old. Following a brief pause, she catches herself and looks again like the professional she has been for the past decade. “But that’s all for after the Olympics.”
Wednesday, October 22, 2008
The Toronto Predators - Coming to an Air Canada Centre Near You!
With their recent article discussing the feasibility of having two NHL hockey teams in Toronto, the Globe and Mail opened a whole wave of responses that made this move seem imminent. While the overwhelming response from the media and fans alike is premature, there are too many arguments for the addition of a second NHL team to the Greater Toronto Area to ignore.
It is an understatement to say that there is a lot of interest in hockey in Toronto and considering the size of the city, it would be easy to find 18,900 fans to sell out the new team's games every night (let's, for convenience sake, call them the Predators). The infrastructure is already in place: there is a strong precedent for teams in the same league sharing facilities, such as the Los Angeles Lakers and Clippers in the L.A. Coliseum, and the Giants and Jets as roommates in Giants Stadium. There is a prospective owner with deep pockets who has been very vocal about his interest in owning an NHL team in Southern Ontario - Research In Motion's Jim Balsillie. He already tried to overpay for the Nashville Predators (and ultimately ended up offering $20 million more than the offer that was accepted, which is suspicious).
The time is right for the game to "grow" into a market that is a proven hotbed. Hockey is the biggest sport in Canada and in spite of the league's recent failures to make inroads in the Southern United States, they need their next franchise to be a runaway success. Of the most frequently named cities that have expressed interest in landing a NHL team (Winnipeg, Hamilton, Quebec City, Kansas City, Houston and Las Vegas), Ontario seems to provide the most financially viable home. There are questions about Winnipeg's fans willingness to pay top-dollar for a ticket and Quebec City needs more companies who have become the top ticket-buyers in today's professional sport landscape (ie, luxury boxes). And following the struggles of the NHL in Nashville, Atlanta and Phoenix, who in their right mind would decide to put a team in Houston or Las Vegas? (On the other hand, who has accused Gary Bettman of being in his right mind?)
One NHL executive who requested anonymity has said, "If you take out the Canadian teams, which have done so well since the lockout largely because of the Canadian dollar, the league's revenues are actually only growing at a 2 per cent clip per year... It's not enough. We're not really growing as a sport, and we're still invisible in the U.S." 1 This says that the league, if not Gary Bettman - who is still committed to growing the game in areas where ice does not naturally occur - has finally realized that they have been under-serving the Canadian fans that they have long taken for granted.
In Southern Ontario there are 15 OHL hockey teams that, by all standards, are considered professional. 4 of those teams make their home in the Greater Toronto Area, which also compete with the AHL's Toronto Marlies. This shows that there is a hockey market that has needs beyond what the Toronto Maple Leafs serve. If New York City has 3 NHL teams and Los Angeles has two, why can't Toronto?
I would argue that the NHL can't afford to NOT add another Toronto team, and at least 1 more elsewhere in Canada. Toronto, the 5th largest market in North America and the biggest hockey city in the world, has 5.5 million fans who are dying to give their money away. The fact that there are Ottawa Senators fans who are Torontonians by birth speaks to the fact that the Maple Leafs aren't meeting everybody's needs.
The NHL also can't afford to expand to a 32 team league. Since they don't want to contract, look for some teams to be migrating back North with the geese over the next 3-5 seasons. When you consider the financial aspect of adding a team to Toronto, consider this: the Maple Leafs earned $1.9 million in ticket revenue every. single. game. last season. ($77.9 million total) To put this in perspective, Phoenix earned $450,000 in ticket revenue... last season. Since 50% of a team's total revenue comes from ticket sales, Phoenix is losing about $35 million dollars every year.
You could read this and say "Phoenix's owners must hate making money!" Or you could read this and remember that the NHL has a revenue-sharing system where the richest teams basically pay the operating costs of the poorest teams. And since 31% of the NHL's revenue over the last two seasons came from its 6 Canadian franchises, realize this: Canucks fans are essentially paying for the Coyotes to rot in the desert. After all, they paid $10 million dollars to support their deadbeat peers last season. The Leafs paid $12 million, Canadiens paid $11.5 million, Flames paid $6 million, Senators paid $1 million and the Oilers paid $800 K. The problem isn't just Phoenix. 11 of the 24 American based teams were either revenue flat or lost money on ticket sales. To put it bluntly, the Coyotes (and 10 other American teams) are on NHL welfare.
This just goes to show that the NHL's current course is ludicrous. How can a league that just underwent a crisis 4 years ago, enough to cancel an entire season, justify not putting a team in a market that will essentially be a license to print money?
It makes too much sense. Toronto needs another NHL team. Kitchener-Waterloo needs an NHL team. Winnipeg needs an NHL team.
After 20 years of trying, the NHL should realize that it needs to end the "Southern Experiment" and give back to the fans who have been keeping the league afloat.
It is an understatement to say that there is a lot of interest in hockey in Toronto and considering the size of the city, it would be easy to find 18,900 fans to sell out the new team's games every night (let's, for convenience sake, call them the Predators). The infrastructure is already in place: there is a strong precedent for teams in the same league sharing facilities, such as the Los Angeles Lakers and Clippers in the L.A. Coliseum, and the Giants and Jets as roommates in Giants Stadium. There is a prospective owner with deep pockets who has been very vocal about his interest in owning an NHL team in Southern Ontario - Research In Motion's Jim Balsillie. He already tried to overpay for the Nashville Predators (and ultimately ended up offering $20 million more than the offer that was accepted, which is suspicious).
The time is right for the game to "grow" into a market that is a proven hotbed. Hockey is the biggest sport in Canada and in spite of the league's recent failures to make inroads in the Southern United States, they need their next franchise to be a runaway success. Of the most frequently named cities that have expressed interest in landing a NHL team (Winnipeg, Hamilton, Quebec City, Kansas City, Houston and Las Vegas), Ontario seems to provide the most financially viable home. There are questions about Winnipeg's fans willingness to pay top-dollar for a ticket and Quebec City needs more companies who have become the top ticket-buyers in today's professional sport landscape (ie, luxury boxes). And following the struggles of the NHL in Nashville, Atlanta and Phoenix, who in their right mind would decide to put a team in Houston or Las Vegas? (On the other hand, who has accused Gary Bettman of being in his right mind?)
One NHL executive who requested anonymity has said, "If you take out the Canadian teams, which have done so well since the lockout largely because of the Canadian dollar, the league's revenues are actually only growing at a 2 per cent clip per year... It's not enough. We're not really growing as a sport, and we're still invisible in the U.S." 1 This says that the league, if not Gary Bettman - who is still committed to growing the game in areas where ice does not naturally occur - has finally realized that they have been under-serving the Canadian fans that they have long taken for granted.
In Southern Ontario there are 15 OHL hockey teams that, by all standards, are considered professional. 4 of those teams make their home in the Greater Toronto Area, which also compete with the AHL's Toronto Marlies. This shows that there is a hockey market that has needs beyond what the Toronto Maple Leafs serve. If New York City has 3 NHL teams and Los Angeles has two, why can't Toronto?
I would argue that the NHL can't afford to NOT add another Toronto team, and at least 1 more elsewhere in Canada. Toronto, the 5th largest market in North America and the biggest hockey city in the world, has 5.5 million fans who are dying to give their money away. The fact that there are Ottawa Senators fans who are Torontonians by birth speaks to the fact that the Maple Leafs aren't meeting everybody's needs.
The NHL also can't afford to expand to a 32 team league. Since they don't want to contract, look for some teams to be migrating back North with the geese over the next 3-5 seasons. When you consider the financial aspect of adding a team to Toronto, consider this: the Maple Leafs earned $1.9 million in ticket revenue every. single. game. last season. ($77.9 million total) To put this in perspective, Phoenix earned $450,000 in ticket revenue... last season. Since 50% of a team's total revenue comes from ticket sales, Phoenix is losing about $35 million dollars every year.
You could read this and say "Phoenix's owners must hate making money!" Or you could read this and remember that the NHL has a revenue-sharing system where the richest teams basically pay the operating costs of the poorest teams. And since 31% of the NHL's revenue over the last two seasons came from its 6 Canadian franchises, realize this: Canucks fans are essentially paying for the Coyotes to rot in the desert. After all, they paid $10 million dollars to support their deadbeat peers last season. The Leafs paid $12 million, Canadiens paid $11.5 million, Flames paid $6 million, Senators paid $1 million and the Oilers paid $800 K. The problem isn't just Phoenix. 11 of the 24 American based teams were either revenue flat or lost money on ticket sales. To put it bluntly, the Coyotes (and 10 other American teams) are on NHL welfare.
This just goes to show that the NHL's current course is ludicrous. How can a league that just underwent a crisis 4 years ago, enough to cancel an entire season, justify not putting a team in a market that will essentially be a license to print money?
It makes too much sense. Toronto needs another NHL team. Kitchener-Waterloo needs an NHL team. Winnipeg needs an NHL team.
After 20 years of trying, the NHL should realize that it needs to end the "Southern Experiment" and give back to the fans who have been keeping the league afloat.
Tuesday, October 14, 2008
Elegy for the Role Model
"Help me help you."
If it were only that simple. If sports agents were more like Jerry Maguire and less like Drew Rosenhaus, maybe we wouldn't find ourselves in this predicament. Who knows when it all started. We should have known that something needed to be fixed when Latrell Sprewell claimed that he couldn't "feed (his) family" on $14.6 million dollars per year. Gone are the days of heroes like Lou Gehrig. In the 21st Century, we have dubious heroes such as Lance Armstrong. Sure we can admire his superhuman feats of strength, but we have the "Did he or didn't he?" debate gnawing at the back of our minds.
Now, we have athletes like Michael Vick, Ugueth Urbina and the Cincinnati Bengals. In fact, as far as I can tell, the only motivation for an athlete to be an upstanding citizen is to maximize his endorsement potential. Take Michael Phelps for example: before he even returned from Beijing, after setting the Olympic record for most gold medals won in a single Games, he was fielding offers from companies who had already drawn up ad-pitches and hundred million dollar contracts.
Something is broken in North American professional sports that desperately needs to be fixed. There is a new focus on money that simply did not exist before. Sure, everybody likes to be valued in the workplace; however, when athletes refuse to play when they are already making $10+ million dollars per season, that is bringing it to a different level.
Sports leagues need to hold their athletes (and their former athletes) more accountable. But in order to do so, they need to educate their athletes on the responsibility they hold to the community that invests in them. They need to institute programs such as the NFL rookie orientation, that introduces players to the challenges and pressures they will face outside the field of competition. The NBA estimates that 60% of its athletes are bankrupt within 5 years of retiring. With such staggering numbers, how can the league not take action to educate their players on how to better handle their finances and their personal lives?
While these programs cannot guarantee that aberrant behavior is a thing of the past, it is a step in the right direction to rehabilitate the 21st Century Athlete.
If leagues don't take these steps, extreme cases such as OJ Simpson, Jose Canseco, and Adam "don't call me Pacman" Jones will continue to persist. Individuals like these are a blemish on the sport and, unfortunately, grab headlines before the good that happens on the field of competition. The media shares some of the blame; however, if they did not have so much fodder with which to lambaste the athletes, the headlines couldn't possibly be as juicy.
Perhaps it is unfair to blame Drew Rosenhaus. Maybe we've reached an age where personal conduct no longer matters - only the almighty dollar is important. But I refuse to believe that. I'd prefer to think that, with education, the good side of athletes will prevail - the good side of humanity will prevail.
We can save the Role Model from extinction. Just help me help you.
If it were only that simple. If sports agents were more like Jerry Maguire and less like Drew Rosenhaus, maybe we wouldn't find ourselves in this predicament. Who knows when it all started. We should have known that something needed to be fixed when Latrell Sprewell claimed that he couldn't "feed (his) family" on $14.6 million dollars per year. Gone are the days of heroes like Lou Gehrig. In the 21st Century, we have dubious heroes such as Lance Armstrong. Sure we can admire his superhuman feats of strength, but we have the "Did he or didn't he?" debate gnawing at the back of our minds.
Now, we have athletes like Michael Vick, Ugueth Urbina and the Cincinnati Bengals. In fact, as far as I can tell, the only motivation for an athlete to be an upstanding citizen is to maximize his endorsement potential. Take Michael Phelps for example: before he even returned from Beijing, after setting the Olympic record for most gold medals won in a single Games, he was fielding offers from companies who had already drawn up ad-pitches and hundred million dollar contracts.
Something is broken in North American professional sports that desperately needs to be fixed. There is a new focus on money that simply did not exist before. Sure, everybody likes to be valued in the workplace; however, when athletes refuse to play when they are already making $10+ million dollars per season, that is bringing it to a different level.
Sports leagues need to hold their athletes (and their former athletes) more accountable. But in order to do so, they need to educate their athletes on the responsibility they hold to the community that invests in them. They need to institute programs such as the NFL rookie orientation, that introduces players to the challenges and pressures they will face outside the field of competition. The NBA estimates that 60% of its athletes are bankrupt within 5 years of retiring. With such staggering numbers, how can the league not take action to educate their players on how to better handle their finances and their personal lives?
While these programs cannot guarantee that aberrant behavior is a thing of the past, it is a step in the right direction to rehabilitate the 21st Century Athlete.
If leagues don't take these steps, extreme cases such as OJ Simpson, Jose Canseco, and Adam "don't call me Pacman" Jones will continue to persist. Individuals like these are a blemish on the sport and, unfortunately, grab headlines before the good that happens on the field of competition. The media shares some of the blame; however, if they did not have so much fodder with which to lambaste the athletes, the headlines couldn't possibly be as juicy.
Perhaps it is unfair to blame Drew Rosenhaus. Maybe we've reached an age where personal conduct no longer matters - only the almighty dollar is important. But I refuse to believe that. I'd prefer to think that, with education, the good side of athletes will prevail - the good side of humanity will prevail.
We can save the Role Model from extinction. Just help me help you.
Monday, August 18, 2008
Hockey Hair: An Analysis
For a sport whose competitors are stereotyped as being masculine and tough, hockey players give a surprising amount of thought and preparation to their physical appearance. Their hairstyles often receive a large amount of attention. The reason for this is simple: their hair is virtually the only part of their bodies that can be seen outside of their hockey equipment.
For years, hockey players did not wear helmets. This allowed their hair to become somewhat of a focal point. Few people who have seen Guy LaFleur fly down the wing or Doug Wilson's perfectly coiffed 'fro-mullet can deny this. The hair even spawned such famous nicknames as “The Golden Jet” and his son, "The Golden Brett".
Football, basketball and baseball players have some outlets to demonstrate some personal flavour. Barring pitchers in the Major Leagues, many athletes have used tattoos as a way to demonstrate their individuality, without compromising the concept of “the uniform”.
In the NHL, a league that is almost devoid of controversy when compared to its 3 prominent American cousins (NFL, NBA, MLB), players are much less outspoken and tend to have fewer disciplinary issues than their non-hockey contemporaries. This is evidenced by the stink raised when Ray Emery dedicated part of his helmet to boxing sideshow Mike Tyson. In the other leagues, this would hardly cause an observer to bat an eye – in the more conservative NHL, it caused a minor schism.
Since it is much more difficult for NHL-ers to stand-out from the crowd than other athletes, they have maintained their hair as a point of interest - the only part of their bodies visible outside of their equipment. While some players take this opportunity to simply be different, this focus on the hair naturally causes other players to respond by growing long locks that can be admired with or without a helmet on. This, my friends, is the true story of Hockey Hair.
Many of those who aren’t properly integrated into the culture of hockey may confuse Hockey Hair with a Mullet. It is a simple cultural misunderstanding that I choose to blame on the 1980’s. At a time when the average sports fan (outside of Canada and select American cities) was becoming aware of the league’s existence, there was one figure who stood above the rest, in terms of name-recognition: Wayne Gretzky. And at the helm of his Los Angeles Kings team was a charismatic young coach who led the team deep into the 1993 Playoffs. Regardless of whether that team won the Cup or not, Barry Melrose and Wayne Gretzky had a hand in permanently marrying the terms “Hockey Hair” and “Mullet”.
While Barry Melrose was erroneously credited with sporting “Hockey Hair,” and in doing so, confused the many of non-traditional hockey fans, Wayne did, in fact, wear his in the true “Hockey Hair” style. There are, however, many differences between true Hockey Hair and the common Mullet.
As many of you know, the Mullet has often been described as “business in the front and party in the back”. It goes by many names: Kentucky Waterfall, Neck Blanket, Mississippi Mudflap, or, my personal favorite, the Ape Drape. It is a hair-do that has been trimmed short from the front until about mid-skull, where it becomes longer and less groomed. In instances where the back is cut, it is still longer than the front half of the hair. Classic examples of the mullet include the aforementioned Melrose, young Jaromir Jagr, and Joe Dirt.
True Hockey Hair, on the other hand, is longer, more flowing hair that protrudes from the sides and back of a hockey helmet. Also known as "flow", it is generally the same length all-around. The back and sides may be shorter than the top, but in most cases the hair is of a similar length all over. Classic examples of desirable hockey hair include José Theodore and Antoine Vermette. Shane Doan does well for himself and while Sidney Crosby can't grow a playoff beard, he has pretty good flow. Thomas Vanek provides an example of more average hockey hair.
The astute among you are undoubtedly thinking: “But Justin, Barry Melrose and Al Iafrate sported classic Mullets – don’t try to tell me those were Hockey Hair.” And my answer to that is: Touché. I won’t try to tell you those were hockey hair. Those were good, old fashioned Mullets. I am not trying to claim that Mullets don’t exist in hockey; it just isn’t their natural environment.
The natural environment of the Mullet is 1985. Or European soccer leagues. And hopefully that is one trend that won’t come back to our neck of the woods.
For years, hockey players did not wear helmets. This allowed their hair to become somewhat of a focal point. Few people who have seen Guy LaFleur fly down the wing or Doug Wilson's perfectly coiffed 'fro-mullet can deny this. The hair even spawned such famous nicknames as “The Golden Jet” and his son, "The Golden Brett".
Football, basketball and baseball players have some outlets to demonstrate some personal flavour. Barring pitchers in the Major Leagues, many athletes have used tattoos as a way to demonstrate their individuality, without compromising the concept of “the uniform”.
In the NHL, a league that is almost devoid of controversy when compared to its 3 prominent American cousins (NFL, NBA, MLB), players are much less outspoken and tend to have fewer disciplinary issues than their non-hockey contemporaries. This is evidenced by the stink raised when Ray Emery dedicated part of his helmet to boxing sideshow Mike Tyson. In the other leagues, this would hardly cause an observer to bat an eye – in the more conservative NHL, it caused a minor schism.
Since it is much more difficult for NHL-ers to stand-out from the crowd than other athletes, they have maintained their hair as a point of interest - the only part of their bodies visible outside of their equipment. While some players take this opportunity to simply be different, this focus on the hair naturally causes other players to respond by growing long locks that can be admired with or without a helmet on. This, my friends, is the true story of Hockey Hair.
Many of those who aren’t properly integrated into the culture of hockey may confuse Hockey Hair with a Mullet. It is a simple cultural misunderstanding that I choose to blame on the 1980’s. At a time when the average sports fan (outside of Canada and select American cities) was becoming aware of the league’s existence, there was one figure who stood above the rest, in terms of name-recognition: Wayne Gretzky. And at the helm of his Los Angeles Kings team was a charismatic young coach who led the team deep into the 1993 Playoffs. Regardless of whether that team won the Cup or not, Barry Melrose and Wayne Gretzky had a hand in permanently marrying the terms “Hockey Hair” and “Mullet”.
While Barry Melrose was erroneously credited with sporting “Hockey Hair,” and in doing so, confused the many of non-traditional hockey fans, Wayne did, in fact, wear his in the true “Hockey Hair” style. There are, however, many differences between true Hockey Hair and the common Mullet.
As many of you know, the Mullet has often been described as “business in the front and party in the back”. It goes by many names: Kentucky Waterfall, Neck Blanket, Mississippi Mudflap, or, my personal favorite, the Ape Drape. It is a hair-do that has been trimmed short from the front until about mid-skull, where it becomes longer and less groomed. In instances where the back is cut, it is still longer than the front half of the hair. Classic examples of the mullet include the aforementioned Melrose, young Jaromir Jagr, and Joe Dirt.
True Hockey Hair, on the other hand, is longer, more flowing hair that protrudes from the sides and back of a hockey helmet. Also known as "flow", it is generally the same length all-around. The back and sides may be shorter than the top, but in most cases the hair is of a similar length all over. Classic examples of desirable hockey hair include José Theodore and Antoine Vermette. Shane Doan does well for himself and while Sidney Crosby can't grow a playoff beard, he has pretty good flow. Thomas Vanek provides an example of more average hockey hair.
The astute among you are undoubtedly thinking: “But Justin, Barry Melrose and Al Iafrate sported classic Mullets – don’t try to tell me those were Hockey Hair.” And my answer to that is: Touché. I won’t try to tell you those were hockey hair. Those were good, old fashioned Mullets. I am not trying to claim that Mullets don’t exist in hockey; it just isn’t their natural environment.
The natural environment of the Mullet is 1985. Or European soccer leagues. And hopefully that is one trend that won’t come back to our neck of the woods.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
