The new Toronto Maple Leaf owners; Lokomotiv Yaroslavl arise; and bad news for the New York Rangers
NHL: five things we learned last week
NHL video highlights
The new Toronto Maple Leaf owners and their plans; Lokomotiv Yaroslavl arise; and bad news for the New York Rangers are among the hockey subjects we discuss this week. Please share your thoughts on these - and other - issues below.
I, for one, welcome our new hockey overlords
One of the biggest stories in the NHL this week was actually a business story. In the last few weeks there had been a lot of chatter about who might buy into Maple Leafs Sports Entertainment (the company that owns, unsurprisingly, the Toronto Maple Leafs; the AHL's Marlies; the NBA's Raptors; and MLS's Toronto FC), from its former owner, the Ontario Teachers' Pension Plan (OTPP). More on them in a second.
Back in November, there was some talk about Wayne Gretzky being asked to become part of a deal to buy the majority of MLSE. That rumour came to nothing, but it did spawn a fairly entertaining side story involving Gretzky's daughter's Twitter account where we learned that sex sells almost everything, but possibly not family pride.
In the end, it was BCE Inc. (Bell), and Rogers Communications ? Canada's two biggest telecom companies ? who together split the cost of a 79 per cent stake in the company. As an aside, it's probably worth noting that Bell also owns a portion of the Montreal Canadiens. We like our monopolies up here.
As an aside, there's actually some history between BCE and the OTPP. Before the OTPP bought British lottery operator, Camelot Group, in 2010 for �389m, it actually tried to buy BCE in 2007 in what would have been the biggest corporate buyout in Canadian history. The deal fell through a year later, and left BCE demanding $1.2bn compensation.
But back to hockey.
The reaction and analysis of the sale is ongoing. Initially when the deal between Bell and Rogers was still a rumour, some, like the Toronto Sun, figured the deal would "leave fans the winner".
"It certainly would divide TV assets up evenly to allow all the major carriers to get a piece of the action and avoids somebody putting together an all Maple Leaf/Raptors type network like you have with the New York Yankees," Sun writer Joe Warmington wrote a day before the deal was finalized.
Amusingly, when the deal was done, the same paper wasn't so sure ? actually, the deal will mean "nothing for the long suffering fans of Toronto." The problem, Steve Simmons wrote, is that Bell and Rogers aren't motivated by winning championships, but by "distribution of content."
Over at the Vancouver Sun (not related to the one in Toronto), Mark Sutcliffe urged caution for the same reason.
"This was a business deal and nothing more. The acquisition isn't about sports; it's about buying and distributing programming... Only one thing gets sworn enemies to work together and it's not the dream of having their names engraved side-by-side on a silver trophy. It's the chance to make a lot of money... The very nature of the deal, with each giant owning 37.5 per cent of the team, suggests that the main objective is to extract value from the sports properties rather than invest in them."
Over on the other side of that argument are the companies, who argue the deal will bring fans more coverage and "bring fans closer to the teams than they ever imagined," according to BCE chief executive George Cope. Which sounds pretty great until you start to consider how close some fans really would like to get. And then it's weird.
Anyway, the naysayers aren't necessarily naysaying, as the deal offers a virtual lock for long-term steady financials for the Leafs. And it's probably true that Leafs fans will get more access to their team, but I'm betting at this point that will come at the cost of a monthly channel subscription. It's not difficult to imagine at this point both Bell and Rogers each offering a Leafs-only channel and then cutting back on their regular, national cable coverage. It would be difficult to do that kind of thing with just about any other team in either the U.S. or Canada, but with the Leafs (and their 'nation'), it's plausible.
And according to some, like the guys at Yahoo!, it decreases the possibility of another team popping up in Southern Ontario ? specifically Hamilton.
"What would be the compelling reason for them to support what is essentially a competitor for the product they now own? A second Toronto team would be competition in every sense, and especially as the scrappy counterpoint to the Leafs. (This option seemed a lot more important before the Leafs started looking like a playoff team.)"
At this point, no matter who owns the Leafs, it seems the idea of another team in either the Toronto suburbs or the Hammer is possibly a dead one for a while. Might as well start looking to Quebec City at this point, where there's a friendlier atmosphere and another willing media conglomerate ? Quebecor ? panting at the possibility.
Lokomotiv rides again
It was only a few months ago that virtually the entire KHL Lokomotiv Yaroslavl hockey club died when their plane crashed shortly after takeoff en route to an season opener in Minsk. But the team has been rebuilt.
According to the Russian International News Agency (RIA Novosti), the team is a "hastily assembled squad of youth players from Lokomotiv and loans from other clubs, were re-entering the sport in the second-tier Major Hockey League to face Neftyanik Almetyevsk in Yaroslavl."
A tribute video was put together:
As it happens, in Canada, the latest issue of Sportsnet magazine features a full-length piece on the team. For the most part, it discusses the families left behind after the crash, but does include a few interesting details like the following:
"On the outskirts of Moscow, the families of the players, coaching staff and crew pay daily visits to Igor Trunov, one of Russia's best-known lawyers... The government and the insurance companies that are now refusing to pay out what's owed to the families of the dead... He has studied the results of the official investigation, but neither he nor anyone else knows why the pilots did not abort the takeoff. He can't even get the government to officially disclose who owned the plane."
On a brighter note, it's probably worth mentioning the rebuilt Lokomotiv team won its opening game 5-1.
Injuries plague Pennsylvania
Both Sidney Crosby and current Superstar Replacement Claude Giroux are going to be sitting out for a bit thanks to head injuries sustained this week. Crosby's suffered new symptoms since he had a mid-ice collision with his teammate Chris Kunitz a little over a week ago. And after a bit of a rough game in Boston, Sid started getting headaches again. Now he's out indefinitely. Which is a shame, obviously, since his return to the ice looked so promising.
Here's this collision with Kunitz:
On Hockey Night in Canada on Saturday, Don Cherry managed to make an interesting point in between his usual hyperventilating. He noted that Crosby is usually the kind of guy who is very aware of his space, and particularly where other players are on the ice. It seemed odd to Grapes that Crosby would have such an awkward run-in with a fellow player in that kind of position. Which is actually something to consider.
In any case, it's a long way down from where Crosby looked to be on the day he returned, and it doesn't bode well for his future, either, if this is the way things are going to keep up. It would have been one thing for him to bow out after the initial hit and (tragically for the sport generally) never hit the NHL ice again, but it may be almost just as difficult to watch him come in and sit back out again over and over, only to possibly quietly shuffle off in a few years. Hopefully that won't be the case.
Meanwhile, in Philadelphia, Claude Giroux had been having a career season until the moment he was accidentally kneed in the back of the head by his teammate Wayne Simmonds. Giroux went down on the ice and Simmonds, who was skating quickly behind him, attempted a triple salchow-double lutz combo over the top of him. Just as he looked like he'd land it, Giroux lifted his head and Simmonds hit it with his knee.
Here's that accidental hit on Giroux, with slow motion (several times) just in case you missed it:
Giroux was evaluated Monday and was expected to miss Tuesday's game against Washington. What it means for the Flyers remains to be seen. What it means for the league stats is further Kessel domination.
Sticking with the Flyers for a moment, it looks as though Chris Pronger is also under concussion watch ? even though the team is only at this point admitting he's suffering from "concussion-like symptoms."
Over at the Philadelphia Sports Daily, Dave Isaac notes that while the term "doesn't translate into an actual concussion," all the signs are there ? including the fact that both of the doctors Pronger is seeing were the same that helped Crosby's recovery.
But in his absence, who might best replace him as captain? Over at the Los Angeles Times' Bleacher Report, they thought it might make for a good slideshow. Everyone loves pictures. More importantly, everyone loves lists. So I'll just note their 5 picks for replacement captain here and steal their thunder a bit:
5. Braydon Coburn
4. Scott Harnell
3. Claude Giroux (Unlikely now, thanks to that head thing, but otherwise deserves to be there.)
2. Daniel Briere
1. Kimmo Timonen
Timmonen was the top choice thanks to his experience and the fact that he's "durable", according to the Report. Which makes him sound a bit like a frying pan, but on second thought is probably exactly what the team needs right about now.
I'm open to hearing other candidates that they might have left out and/or other adjectives necessary to describe the next Flyers captain (ie. "strong-headed", "tough-minded").
Rangers have a tough week in PR
This past week was always going to be a tough one for the Rangers, what with the Derek Boogaard saga emerging in the New York Times, and yet it was still worse than it needed to be.
Let's get to the reaction to Boogaard's story first.
The Times followed up on its huge Boogaard piece over at its Slap Shot hockey blog and in the opinion pages.
According to Jeff Z. Klein, Rangers players were instructed not to talk too much about Boogaard or, specifically it seems, about the Times' drug allegations. They asked Sean Avery about the story and ? maybe for the first time ever ? he had very little to say.
"I certainly have opinions on it, but we've been told not to comment," Avery said. Which I think is a shame. This is one time I'd really like to hear what he has on his mind.
Anyway, Ryan Callahan was a bit more forthcoming, even though he apparently wasn't supposed to be when he was asked about the plethora of painkillers Boogaard is said to have obtained from team doctors.
"I know anytime we need anything there's a long list of guys you have to go through to get it. You've got to speak to a doctor, have a doctor evaluate you, you've got to have a trainer evaluate you, and then if they feel medicine is needed for you to get better, then they'll give it to you," he said, at which point, according to the Times, a team media relations flak said that questions related to painkillers were off limits.
Which really doesn't help someone like Bettman who was quick to dismiss that aspect of the story. Putting those questions off limits doesn't make anything look any better.
Over at the Times' opinion page, George Vecsey wondered if it was all part of one of the worst months for sports, given the news coming out of Penn State's football program earlier in November. On Boogaard specifically, he had some good points to make about the culture of the game:
"We need to acknowledge this up front: It was not just the leaders of the N.H.L. who encouraged these grubby fights. It was also the people on the other side of the barricades ? the fans who cheer the punches and the blood, the members of the news media who revel in the violence, and the enablers who ran the entire hockey system while Derek Boogaard's brain was being destroyed...
...The lesson from his elders was: learn to hurt somebody. The system was also producing Sidney Crosby and dozens of other skilled players, but thousands of coaches and trainers and advisers and sponsors were simultaneously running a production line of child fighters."
Which is certainly valid. Boogaard wasn't a one-off that simply materialized in a vacuum; he was the product of his environment, to which we've all contributed to in some way.
But just in case that wasn't enough to deal with, the Rangers then had to fight off the media (and a few members of the Tampa Bay Lightening) after forward Artem Anisimov decided (on the day of another shooting at Virginia Tech, no less) to point his stick like a gun at the net after scoring a goal.
Here's the video:
Yeah. Awkward.
Anisimov later apologized, explaining it was the same move used by a former teammate of his in Russia, Ilya Gorokhov who played for ? wait for it ? Lokomotiv Yaroslavl. So, it was still uncomfortable, but in that context seems perhaps a little less so ? and maybe also not, as the gentlemen over at NESN put it, a "disgrace to hockey".
Goals of the week
OK, goals of the week time, in which Buffalo looks good, Anaheim actually scores (!), and Ottawa gets away with a lucky one at the top of the list.
You can get all the latest news, views and live coverage of north American sports from The Guardian via our Twitter feed or our new Facebook page.
Source: http://www.guardian.co.uk/sport/blog/2011/dec/14/toront-maple-leafs-derek-boogaard-sidney-crosby
Brent Seabrook Keith Seabrook Dennis Seidenberg Andrej Sekera
No comments:
Post a Comment