<-- SEPARATED AT BIRTH?!?! -->
David Shoalts' latest article, Question marks surround Leafs, is totally fucked. It is so bad, in fact, that I swore I was reading it at sportsnet.ca.
The article describes Shoalts' opinion that there are several telltale signs in place that point to this being the Leafs' last chance at success before a rebuilding. He points to JFJ's lack of contract extension, the search for a mentor to the GM, and Mats Sundin's one-year deal as potentially ominous signs of impending doom. Shoalts tells us that Leafs brass could pull the plug and begin to rebuild the team from the General Manager down.
With that, I take no issue - let's face it, the moves are entirely possible. The Leafs squad of late is simply not good enough to win a Stanley Cup. Several positive moves were made in the off-season, but this likely translates only into a playoff berth - a Cup is still far away.
Shoalts' article is the journalistic equivalent of a Turkish Homerun on almost every other front. Especially shitty selections are copied below in italics.
"Ferguson's problem is two-fold. First, despite some decent moves on his part, the Leafs are not dramatically better than they were last season, when they finished one point out of the playoffs. Second, as in too many other seasons, the GM is left hoping several long-shot gambles pay off in order for the team to make the playoffs."
Fuck, Shoalts. How do you concede that the GM made 'decent moves', mention that the team missed the playoffs by only one point, then go on to say 'several long-shot gambles' must pay off in order to make the playoffs this year? Add in the fact that the team that took the final playoff position last season (New York Islanders) is significantly worse, your logic simply doesn't hold water.
"Forget any thoughts of Bell making a significant contribution, even if his suspension for alcohol problems is lifted. He was put on the first line by two teams last season and could not score, even with Sharks star Joe Thornton as his centre."
Very interesting, Shoalts. Mark Bell was put on the first line by two teams last season? Interesting indeed, as Mark Bell only played for one team last season - the San Jose Sharks. How does an error like this get printed? Proof-read your stories, Dave. Mark Bell was part of the first line in Chicago two seasons ago - potentially that is where Shoalts' error stemmed from - but let us not forget that Bell's last season in Chicago was a 25 goal campaign that had him pegged as one of the NHL's top up-and-coming power forwards.
Moreover, I am officially calling shenanigans on the Mark-Bell-did-fuck-all-last season-and-played-with-Joe-Thornton stories. The fact is that Mark Bell saw very limited time with Thornton and Cheechoo last season. He didn't play well last year, and that is not being questioned here, but Mark Bell was stuck on the 4th line for the majority of the season, playing well under 10 minutes per game. Fuck you, David Shoalts, for insinuating that Mark Bell shit the bed while playing on one of the best lines in hockey. For the majority of the season, it simply didn't happen that way.
"All he's done so far is prove he was a bargain for the San Jose Sharks at $1.375-million (U.S.) a year. Toskala took the starter's job away from Evgeni Nabokov for long stretches, but the most regular-season appearances he made was 38, and come the playoffs last spring, Nabokov was the Sharks' man."
This must be one of the 'long-shot gambles' - along with Mark Bell - that Shoalts mentioned above. I will assume it is, as if not for Bell and Toskala, who exactly are the long shots?
Again, I don't understand Shoalts' approach. Concede that Vesa Toskala stole the #1 job from Evgeni Nabokov (a really fucking good goaltender) for 'long stretches' but also mention that he is an unproven gamble. More information from Shoalts would give insight into the realities involved:
(1) Toskala hasn't made more than 38 regular season appearances because he was in a platoon situation (again, with a really fucking good goaltender) for the few seasons he's been in the NHL. When Edmonton picked up Dwayne Roloson from a platoon situation in Minnesota, we didn't hear about how risky it was. Roloson promptly took the Oilers to the Cup final. The teams that are after Ilya Bryzgalov don't seem to be worried about the lack of experience, either.
(2) Evgeni Nabokov was the playoff goaltender only because an injury to Toskala opened the door for him. Toskala had firmly been the #1 goaltender in San Jose in the stretch previous to his injury.
(3) Toskala has improved his win totals every season in the league.
"By paying free-agent winger Jason Blake $5-million, the GM is hoping the 34-year-old can hit 40 goals for the second time, although the Leafs should be happy with 30."
OK, Dave, the Leafs technically are paying Jason Blake $5 million this season, but that is an irrelevant figure. Blake signed a 5-year deal that pays him $20 million. The number that matters is Blake's average salary - the amount that counts against the salary cap - which is $4 million. Giving Blake $5 million in his first season (and $4.5 million in the second and third seasons) means Blake will earn $3 million during the final two seasons as a Leaf. Front-loading Blake's salary translates into an easier buyout should he not produce during those final two seasons when he is in his late 30's. Seems to be a (rare) smart move on the GM's part. And since when is a 30 goal scorer something to sneeze at?
No comments:
Post a Comment