O Canada, Our Home and Naïve Land

“Americans are benevolently ignorant about Canada, while Canadians are malevolently well informed about the United States.”
--J. Bartlett Brebner

Canadians may very well be well-informed about the U.S. on many occasions, just not this one. Very rarely do I read something that can make me so angry that I actually have to walk away from the article. Often times I’ll read something in another city’s newspaper and disagree (or even question their motives), but it doesn’t go much further than a dismissing laugh. The Calgary Sun’s coverage of Michael Cammalleri coming to town definitely struck a nerve—and I don’t think I’m the only one.

When an organization is able to land a point-per-game player, I understand that an entire city should be happy. I liked Cammy when he was in L.A., and at the same time I completely understand why he was traded. As of today, the trade the sent Cammalleri to the Flames for the right to draft Colten Teubert looks like a win-win for both teams. So why did a Calgary-based writer feel the need to bash King fans while covering Cammy’s arrival?

Apparently it will be a new experience for Cammy to play in front of die-hard fans. Let’s see, I spent my tuition money on tickets when I was in college. My friend has traveled all over to see the Kings play—including to the almighty Calgary. Philly Phan and his parents took me to games every year with their season tickets, even though it meant a 50 mile drive each way to south central LA on week nights.

Here’s the gold standard for dedication. When I was in Chicago for business in my early 20’s, I extended my stay for an extra day to catch a game between the Kings and Blackhawks. I took a bus (not the safest mode of transportation in Chicago) to the United Center (not the safest neighborhood in the Midwest) so I could cruise the lots for a scalper. I scored VIP tickets at the blueline, watched the Kings win 5-1, talked enough junk to hold my own vs. the 9,000 Blackhawk fans in attendance (post about 73892 Linnie’s Reds brought to me by my server). While drunk, I got BACK onto public transportation with my Kings jersey and with 20 angry Blackhawk fans. Throwing caution to the wind, I supported my team behind enemy lines alone. Tell me, does that sound like I was invested with my heart?

I have to remember that this was an unknowledgeable media member spewing his ignorance on a topic he clearly shouldn’t be tackling. I have no problem with him covering Cammalleri’s arrival to the Stampede City, but I’d rather he left out the personal attacks on a fan-base that he clearly has no familiarity in dealing with. I wonder if he’ll ever realize what it takes to follow a team when they’re NOT winning. Watching the Kings rebuild from the ground-up has been painful for all of the hockey fans in L.A. But just because it’s hard, it doesn’t mean that we’ll leave our team. King fans (maybe more than any other fans in L.A.) loyally stick through the ups and downs of the franchise. Obviously, the valleys have outnumbered the peaks in their 40 years, but that further highlights their dedication.

The writer goes on to explain how there will be pressure in Calgary because of the media’s attention towards their hockey team. That isn’t a hockey or a media thing, that’s a CULTURAL thing. Los Angeles is simply more laid back in every facet of life, not just sporting coverage. I could make the argument that if hockey results affect your everyday life, then maybe you should reassess your priorities in life. Fortunately, I won’t—mostly because then I would have to reassess my own preferences in life!

Just a parting shot towards that writer though. I was thinking about the histories of each of these franchises, and it occurred to me that some King fans have been invested in this team for 15 years longer than the Flames have been in existence. I’m not saying that Flames fans aren’t dedicated; I’m just saying that we’re on equal footing here. In fact, I know the Calgary Cowboys folded after two years in Alberta in the mid-1970s. I assumed it was because the WHA was struggling, but I came to find out that the team closed its doors because there was a lack of fan support and they could not sell enough season tickets.

Hey, at least L.A. fans support our teams enough that they don’t have to disband. But what do I know? Clearly I don’t care as much as anyone from Calgary.

Does the NHL view HOCKEY as a regional sport?

I like to think of myself as a man’s man. I’m not down with chick-flicks, I am a drama-free zone when I’m at work, and shopping is NOT my favorite pastime. But when I flew to New York last week, I knew I’d be hitting up the NHL Store in midtown Manhattan. It’s not easy to find a Calgary Flames sweatshirt in Southern California, so what better place to find one than on the east coast? (Yes, in retrospect, I know that doesn’t make any sense whatsoever).

When I walked into the store, it didn’t surprise me to see New York Rangers and Pittsburgh Penguins stuff all over the place. The NHL looks like they’re ready to flood the market with as much “Winter Classic” apparel as possible even though it’s still 5 months away. Neither of those really shocked me—anytime I see anything from the league, they seem to be pushing the Pens, the Rangers, or the Winter Classic.

I think the most stunning facet of my visit was the stuff that I did NOT see. If the team wasn’t from the Northeast, their gear was noticeably absent from the “NHL Store.” Maybe it should be renamed the “NHL’s Atlantic Division” store. If that were the case, I’d have no problem with the selective gear they chose to push.

I’m not going to write about how they didn’t have a Calgary Flames hoodie for me to snatch. It seemed like this store (which is actually run by the NHL and Rbk) showed some of the fundamental flaws for the league as a whole. Not only did it show the imperfections, but it shows that the NHL knows that they have a problem. Let me explain…

The NHL (more specifically, Gary Bettman) has been trying to expand into non-traditional hockey markets ever since Gretzky was traded to L.A. Out were cities like Winnipeg, Quebec City, and Hartford only to be replaced with the Phoenixes, Raleighs, and Atlantas of the world. Here’s the problem: people in the Sunbelt don’t care about hockey. It pains me to say that, and I wish it wasn’t true, but let’s be real. People in Toronto care more about hockey than people in Tampa.

Clearly the NHL knows it too. In a retail environment where the almighty dollar is king, there was nothing resembling a Coyote or a Blue Jacket in the entire place. At first I figured that it was just the northeast-centric nature of New York City. But then I looked around a little more and it became clear that there were only a few teams adequately represented. Predictably, there were Maple Leaf sweatshirts, Sabre shirts and Montreal polos. Gretzky, Crosby and Ovechkin were very well represented. Of course, there were hats, shirts, banners and any other article of memorabilia you can imagine with Detroit’s logo and a Stanley Cup. All of that was anticipated.

But where was the Anaheim Ducks gear? Didn’t they win the Cup just a season ago? How about the Sharks who were the 2nd best team in the Western Conference? At first I thought it was a west coast thing. Then I looked for anything related to the Hurricanes or Lightning and again I was turned away. Last time I checked, they were the last 2 Eastern Conference teams to win it all. That’s when my mind turned toward something much bigger than a New York absorbed hockey league.

The only team from the West that was represented was the Red Wings. In a store that is supposed to represent the entire league, there wasn’t anything from below the Mason-Dixon Line. The league has to know that these franchises are struggling. Hell, they won’t even stock their own store with their stuff because they know it won’t sell. The entire point of the store is to make money, and they are only stocking gear from the northeast teams. That has to say something!

What about cities like Atlanta? The Atlanta market has already lost a team once and by all indicators they should lose the Thrashers as well. A team like the Florida Panthers can play to an arena 20% empty and that would mark a good season in regards to attendance. With the constant ownership questions surrounding the Predators, their future is “as stable as a drunk on shaky ground” (thank you Widespread Panic). If it was not for the league’s intervention, the Preds would already be playing their home games in Hamilton, ON.

It seems like the only things that will sell represent teams where hockey is part of the culture. Hockey isn’t going anywhere in Canada. In the states, Minnesota, New England and upstate New York look to have a grassroots hockey system that are as strong as ever.

As much as Gary Bettman may want to try, I don’t see how hockey is ever going become a way of life in the western and southern United States. I love this game more than what’s socially acceptable, but I’m in the minority. I completely understand the league offices making every attempt to expand and grow the game across the country. It’s good business to maximize the earning potential of the product. However, its also good business to cut your loses when expenditures are no longer an investment. The NHL’s broken business model led to the work stoppage a few years ago, only to be replaced with another flawed business model. Only 3 short seasons after the league lost a season due to a lockout (enforced by the owners), there are already franchises claiming they are losing money because of the rapidly rising salary cap. Wasn’t the entire point of giving up a season financial stability? Maybe it’s the notion of playing hockey in South Beach that’s causing the underlying economic difficulties.

There seems to be a disconnect between what the league says in public and what they produce when it comes time to make money. They SAY that the league is thriving all over the continent, yet the same 5 or 6 teams are constantly shown on NBC. They say the league is bringing in fans from non-traditional markets, but when they sell the merchandise those same franchises are nowhere to be found. It’s just not adding up. They’re not even using their store to promote there up-and-coming teams. It would be nice to see them be proactive in SOME area of their marketing scheme, wouldn’t it?

And to think, all I wanted was a Calgary sweatshirt.

The Greatest King’s Arrival

“To love one that is great, is almost to be great one's self.”
--Madame Neckar

Twenty years ago to the day, hockey and the NHL changed forever. Canada lost one of its national treasures; while Southern California added yet another person to its repertoire of famous people. Two decades later and the ever-changing sports landscape has never been the same. Twenty years ago Wayne Gretzky came to L.A.

For all of his triumphs and accolades, Wayne Gretzky’s most enduring legacy is that he made the NHL viable in the Sunbelt. Whether hockey in the warm weather states has a long term future is a different conversation for a different day. If it wasn’t for the trade that Peter Pocklington made to send Gretzky to the Kings, expansion wouldn’t have been an option.

It wasn’t the record breaking skill that proved to be the most important attribute that he could contribute. Gretzky was able to create a buzz around the Kings that the team had never seen before (or since). He provided star power in a city that lives on star power. He personified the boost the fledgling team needed to merely survive. First the first time in their history, the Kings were able to bring-in the casual sports fan around L.A. Celebrities would come out in full force, and they in turn, brought the attention of the average Joe.

Native Canadian and California resident Alan Thicke always had a joke about the state of the Kings franchise before the arrival of The Great One. “What time does the game start?” someone would ask. His response: “What time can you be there?” Attendance wasn’t exactly the Kings strong suit in the early 1980s. As great as the Triple Crown line was, it never permeated the psyche of Californians. Gretzky’s arrival changed all of that.

I’ll never forget when I was in Vancouver 5 years ago for the 15th anniversary of the trade. The local news led with the story, TSN dedicated the first 10 minutes of their broadcast to the transaction, and it was on the front page of the newspaper. An “analyst” on one of the stations was talking about how Gretz left the land that he loved because, “that selfish B-actress wife of his needed to be in L.A. so she could star in Police Academy 7.” I’m paraphrasing there, but I think that captures the general degree of hate that was conveyed. I had no idea that it was STILL that big of a deal in Canada. I can just imagine what they were feeling in Edmonton.

One of the aspects of the trade that doesn’t get nearly enough attention is the part where Bruce McNall sent $15 million to the Edmonton franchise (in addition to the players sent to Alberta). In many ways, August 9, 1988 can be pointed to as the first time where small-market teams were forced to give up a star player because of financial concerns. Even though the Oilers were the dominate team in the 1980s, it was revealed that management was having money problems and THAT was the only reason they traded Gretzky. Little did the sports world know that this issue would be a slippery slope would lead to a pair of work-stoppages in hockey and eventually usher in the salary cap era.

All of the things that Wayne Gretzky brought the NHL have been beaten to death. I thought that on this memorable day, I’d remind all Kings fans to remember the excitement they felt on that historic day. I can’t believe it's been 20 years—but I’m still waiting for that Cup he was supposed to bring with him!

(Pictures can be found at Google Images)

Who is the better #19?

"Our similarities are different."
-- Philip James Bailey

I was watching one of the classic series from NHL network last week and they were replaying some of the memorable moments from the Red Wings/Avalanche rivalry in the 1990s. Maybe it was the same #19 on their backs and maybe it was the “C” stitched to the front of their jersey—but I started comparing Joe Sakic to Steve Yzerman. Both were first round draft picks in the entry draft, both were scoring phenoms that immediately produced in the pros, and both were captain of their team by the age of 21. Each of them started on teams that were one of the worst in the league, yet both were able to lead their respective teams out of obscurity to multiple Stanley Cups. So that sparked an interesting thought: Who’s the better #19?

Any discussion that tries to encapsulate Stevie Y’s career has to begin with his leadership qualities. This is a man that is revered to this day in Motown for the things he did for the Red Wings organization—and by extension the city of Detroit. He is the type of captain that transcends the sport of hockey and seeped into the mainstream in his city. Billboards showed his face, his image represented the quiet working man’s mentality the city prided itself on, and he brought the Red Wings back to relevancy. Before his arrival in the mid-1980s, Detroit was less Hockeytown and more Tigerville. 20 years and 3 Cups later, the Red Wings own the city and are the model franchise for the entire league. The man’s number was basically retired by Wayne Gretzky for all of Team Canada because of the skills and qualities that he brought to their teams in international competition. I’d say he has his share of intangibles. Here’s what one of Detroit’s favorite columnists had to say about him:

“Yzerman is not the youngest, the strongest, nor the fastest, and he was never the biggest. But make no mistake, he is the maximus of gladiators, the man who fights wounded and bleeding, with a heart as large as any lion they spring on him”
--Mitch Albom

His most memorable performance was in the 2002 playoffs when he was able to score 23 points while leading the Red Wings to the Stanley Cup. The points were secondary though, as he was performing on basically one leg. Minus any noticeable cartilage in his knee, he was able to provide the leadership on and off the ice to lead his team to the Promised Land.

Besides all of the subjective qualities Yzerman brought to the rink, he was also able to deliver with his talent. By the end of his career, he was just 8 goals shy of 700 and finished 6th all time with 1755 points. His 155 points in the 1988-1989 season has only been matched by men named Gretzky and Lemieux. Later in his career, he willingly gave up some of his scoring role to dedicate himself to becoming a better two-way player. Once a defensive liability, by the end of his career he transformed himself into one of the best DEFENSIVE centers in the game. A leader, warrior, and former sniper who became responsible in his own end of the ice to guide his team to 3 Stanley Cups. That is his legend.

Joe Sakic’s career doesn’t have the awe of the Yzerman aura. Instead, he’s formed his legacy with a celebrated lightning quick wrist shot and more clutch performances than anyone in his generation. In his 2nd, 3rd, and 5th seasons in the league, he scored over 100 points (and narrowly missed the century mark in his 4th season despite missing 13 games due to injury). In addition to his early numbers, the case could be made that he’s aged better than fine wine. In the 8 seasons since his 30th birthday, Sakic has managed to be in the Top 10 in scoring six of those seasons. After missing almost 40 games due to injury last season, he was able to come back and score a point per game in the playoffs. Really, his best season was the 2000-2001 season in which he scored a staggering 118 points in the neutral zone trap era. If you adjust those numbers to the late 1980’s, that total translates to about 168 points. In addition to the mountain of points he collected, he also earned the Hart Trophy, the Stanley Cup, and came in 2nd for the Selke Trophy. Even while he was racking up one of his best statistical seasons, he was honored as one of the best defensive forwards. His 2001 year is one for the ages.

Like Yzerman, Joe Sakic has been a man that led by example. In a locker room that housed players like Peter Forsberg, Patrick Roy, Adam Foote, and Rob Blake—it was Sakic that was the unquestioned leader. In his greatest year (2001), he too led his team to the ultimate prize while battling through injury. In the 1st round, he injured his shoulder—and injury during the regular season that would have sidelined him for almost 2 months. Battling through injuries, he was still able to net 13 goals while dishing out 13 helpers en route to leading all playoff performers in points.

When all is said and done with Sakic’s career, he’ll be remembered most for his ability to raise his game in the most pressure packed situations. He has averaged over a point per game in his 174 career playoff games. He’s the career leader with EIGHT playoff overtime game winning goals. His 18 goals in the 1996 playoffs were second only to Wayne Gretzky’s all-time mark for a single playoff year. Even in the international spotlight, Sakic was a clutch performer in the most important moments. In the 2002 Olympics, he was the offensive catalyst to the Canadian Dream team. He netted 4 goals and 7 points (including 4 points in the Gold Medal game) en route to earning MVP of the Tournament honors. On the biggest of stages, he always raised his game to the highest level.

So who is better? As surprising as it was to me, I found that Joe Sakic actually has better overall career statistics. He has a higher career point per game average, a higher career PLAYOFF point per game average, and has been much more consistent throughout his career. Both have been the faces of their franchises over 2 decades and both are in the top 8 in career points. I guess it comes down to what you value more in a player. Leadership qualities cannot be measured by any number; yet at the end of the day, it’s production is what wins games.

I think I’ll just take both and call it a day…