Who else?

So, on the brink of what may go down as one of the biggest tank job in North American sports history, it is difficult to be optimistic about the Vancouver Canucks' prospects of winning tonight against the Chicago Blackhawks, let alone capturing Lord Stanley's mug.

GM Mike Gillis can talk about the way the referees have called the series; coach Alain Vigneault can continue to crack jokes in his shorts; Roberto Luongo can try to be funny when talking to reporters... the bottom line is, the Blackhawks have turned the tide completely, and Vancouverites, collectively, aren't sure if Vancouver can do anything about it.

Those who know me know that I am a HUGE Trevor Linden fan. In addition to the outstanding community work Linden does, in addition to his character and persona, ultimately, it's his playoff heroics that makes him different from everyone else. Linden has more points scored in game 7 than any other Canuck, was at a-point-a-game playoff performer, and, most importantly, raised his game to a whole new level when it matters the most. If you have been following the Canucks long enough, you will probably remember these:

Linden scoring overtime winner vs. Dallas, Game 7, 2007

Linden: he will play, last minute of 1994 playoffs vs. New York Rangers

The Canucks, even in the final years of Linden's career, knew they had Linden to count on for a big goal... do they have such a player right now? It's not the Sedins, who will quietly do their thing but still haven't shown me that they can take over a game; it's certainly not Luongo, who, in spite of all the accolades, is, in my opinion, an inferior playoff goalie than Kirk McLean... If there is someone who can step up and be the game 7 hero tonight, I believe it would be Ryan Kesler. He has been shutting down Jonathan Toews and hasn't done much offensively himself, but if he really wants to take that next step to become a great player, tonight would be the night when he shows up both offensively and defensively.

It's all you, Kesler; all you.

Go Canucks go!

Congratulations, Markus Naslund!

I am very happy to learn that the Vancouver Canucks will be retiring former captain Markus Naslund's number 19 jersey this upcoming season amidst the franchise's fortieth year celebration.

The choice of retiring Naslund's number, however, was not a slam-dunk like it was to retire Trevor Linden's number 16. In many ways, those reasons are somewhat valid; however, I do not feel they are strong enough to keep "Nazzy's" jersey away from the rafters.

First, let's look at Naslund's stats: he led Vancouver in scoring for seven seasons, scored 30 or more goals six times and had three consecutive seasons with 40 or more goals. He scored 346 goals as a Canuck and remains Vancouver's leading scorer with 756 points. The all-time franchise leader in points alone should get considerable weight in the decision for a jersey retirement, wouldn't you think?

Next, let's look at his contribution to the team. When Naslund took over the role to become the Canucks' 11th captain, he was succeeding a mess that was left behind by the Mike Keenan-Mark Messier era. The team was drawing poorly, had deserted many of its fans under Keenan and Messier, and had become a laughing stock of a franchise which the Canucks were in the late 1980s. Naslund took the rein of the team, and quietly changed the way the Canucks were seen around the league. The Canucks became a contender; played an exciting brand of hockey that brought fans back into the rink; and actually had a couple kicks at making a run at Lord Stanley's mug. Sure, the team did not get over the hump in the playoffs, but can this really be blamed on Naslund? What about Dan Cloutier's blunder against Detroit? What about Todd Bertuzzi's hit that sent the franchise into darkness? What did Naslund have to do with these?

Some would still counter by saying that Stan Smyl and Trevor Linden had less talent than Naslund had around him, and still took their teams to the Stanley Cup Finals. But let us not forget that it may be that one bounce that separated a team that became a team of destiny and a bust: remember the overtime save Kirk McLean made in the 94 run? I love Trevor Linden and Kirk McLean, but without that save, even with the iron-will of Trevor Linden, the Canucks would not have made it out of the first round in 1994. In sports, that one finite centimeter sometimes does make a world of a difference.

Sure, Naslund was not your typical captain. But neither was Trevor Linden. Naslund and Linden both went out onto the rink, and led quietly by playing and helping their teammates play better. We all remember Linden's broken nose and his bloody sweater in 1994 when remembering the grit he had and the determination he showed, but to say Naslund did not pay a price throughout his career would be completely inaccurate. Sure, the guy was honest to a fault when answering reporters' questions; he even admitted that his team "choked" in the playoffs, but being honest has nothing to do with how hard he played, and how much he had helped this franchise.

To me, Trevor Linden will always remain my number 1 Canuck, and the best Canuck captain ever. However, I have absolutely no problem seeing Markus Naslund's jersey hung side-by-side to Linden's jersey; in fact, I am very proud to see the quiet, unassuming captain receiving this honour by the franchise he has given 11 of his playing career for. Congratulations, Mr. Markus Naslund!

I Love the Winter Classic!

Even though I am not born and raised in the snowy weather of the east, as a Canadian, you cannot help but appreciate the show the NHL has been putting on the last few years on New Year’s Day – the Winter Classic.

This year’s version of the outdoor regular season game was played at Fenway Park, the iconic home of MLB’s storied franchise, the Boston Red Sox. The home team, needless to say, was the Boston Bruins, and they squared off against their divisional rival, the Philadelphia Flyers.

While the game was not the most spectacular, and the ice condition was not ideal, it was still a game where, once you started watching, became very difficult to leave behind. The overtime finish helped made the game even more memorable, but the scenes alone were good enough for me. If you don’t believe me, check out these pictures captured from the game:

For someone who has bashed NHL commissioner Gary Bettman as much as I did, I must also give him credit for the Winter Classic. Even for someone who has not grown up playing in the backyard ice pond with my buddies on makeshift boards and rinks, the atmosphere and the fell of the game were still spectacular to me. I cannot even begin to imagine how the game must have felt for those who had more of the history than me with the sports.

Great job, commissioner! Now, let’s do the next right thing, and fold some of the teams that are playing out in markets where hockey is not cared about, and bring the NHL back to cities like Winnipeg and Quebec (for whatever reason, the Winnipeg Jets and the Quebec Nordiques were two of my favourite teams besides the Canucks growing up...).

Instant replay, please!

It is the hand that is talked about world-wide; it is the hand that receives the most coverage since Diego Maradona’s infamous “hand of god.” Yes, Thierry Henry’s handball that directly put France into the World Cup tournament in South Africa is what I want to talk about today, and I have only one take on this topic: introduce instant replay to soccer, and any other sport where a poor judgment call can be so costly.

For those of you who do not follow soccer/football, here’s what happened: in a winner-take-all match between the Republic of Ireland and France, where the winner is qualified to be one of the 32 teams to compete for the World Cup, and the loser is sent home, French star Thierry Henry went off-side and used his hand to move the ball to his right feet, allowing him to pass the ball to teammate William Gallas, who scored the winning goal in extra time. The result? France is going to the World Cup; Ireland is going home.

Back to the issue of instant replay. The “strongest” opposing takes against instant replay fall into one of two sorry categories: one, it will slow the flow of the game down; two, it is against the tradition/culture of the game. Both arguments cannot be more unacceptable, and here's why:

Soccer/Football is already a "slow" sport to begin with, in the sense that it contains a lot of plotting and build-up before the rare goals. In moments where a major dispute occurs, pausing the game for two minutes to make the right call is not any more "wasteful" than watching a player act as if he was shot by bullets, rolling all over the pitch until the referee pulls out a yellow card against another player whose leg did not even touch that rolling player. Is soccer/football fans can bear watching that nonsense happening frequently on the pitch, then waiting two minutes for the referees to make the right call certainly would not be unbearable.

As for the "traditions" of the game. Traditionally, surgeons don't use any anti-septic to clean their surgical instruments, and there were no anesthetics to put one out, does that mean that such old practice should remain in the medical field? Even bringing the talk back to the soccer/football pitch, they did not have the sleek shoes, the aero-dynamic shirts back in the day, so why are companies spending big bucks trying to develop gear that would improve performance by a fraction of a percent?

Fact is, the technology is here, and it can make the game's results that much more convincing. If FIFA truly cares about the development of this "world's sport," it should introduce instant replay before the World Cup. Allow each time to have a maximum number of challenges similar to tennis and American football, but the right call needs to be made, no matter what the sport is, and that's the bottom line.

The Andre Agassi Saga

There may not be a lot of tennis fans out there, but as a long-time tennis fan (and a little bit of a player myself), the recent revelations that retired tennis star Andre Agassi were still big to me.

For those of you who have not followed tennis/sports news, the former tennis great revealed in a book that he had always hated tennis, and was only forced to play by a verbally demanding (or abusive) father. Agassi also told the world that the very famous hair that he had in his early days turned out to be fake. But the most shocking revelation he gave was that he had used crystal meth during his playing time, and lied to the ATP (the professional organization for men’s tennis) about a failed drug test…

Andre Agassi had always been a tennis player that I liked. When he first came out and was rocking that crazy mane, and when he was playing in torn-up jeans, I marveled at his rebellious image (I was young then too). When he showed up, for the first time, at Wimbledon in his all-white tennis attire, I was rooting for him. Later on in his career, he became a standard for determination on the court. Though he was never my favourite tennis player, he was always a player that I liked, and I liked him a lot.

Did these revelations change the way I look at Agassi? Not a whole lot. I have long come to the realization that we really do not know these people – athletes, movie stars, public figures… many of them have a dark side to them, and though I do not condone that dark side, it is no different than a friend who is struggling with substance abuse issues, or a person I work with who is fighting a losing battle against some personal demons. Yes, Agassi is an athlete, and a very famous one at that. He has, like it or not, become a role model for many. If you have been reading from me long enough, you would know that I have always given praise to individuals, but I have long stopped worshipping them or expecting them to be, holistically, a role model (many of them still have attributes we can learn from and model from).

This, however, does not mean Agassi is spared from my criticism. The drug use, the lies he told the ATP aside, I do question his motives behind this. Many have argued that he is not doing this for the money (he was paid five million dollars up front to write this book) but is instead using this in as an emotional therapy to his past demons. While I do not deny the therapeutic side to his actions, I would also question why these revelations were not given without a return, or why they were not revealed while he was still on tour, but instead came after he had retired, and after he has been fading from the limelight. So these revelations are helping himself emotionally… but while he’s at it, he may as well get paid really, really well to do that.

Just another star that has fallen. If anyone is still idol-worshipping after one of these celebrities, you are naïve behind belief…

Time to re-examine how we view athletes

The recent news involving Chicago Blackhawks’ star forward Patrick Kane is shocking, but not the least surprising. It merely adds to a long list of athletes who have gone “knuckle-head” to make a fool of themselves.

For those of you who do not follow professional sports and are not aware of the incident, here it is in a nutshell: the 20-year-old forward (left) was returning home with his cousin from a party at 4:00 a.m. this past Sunday on a taxicab. According to reports, the cab fare was $13.80USD. Kane paid the driver $15.00 (some reports said $20.00), and the cab driver could only return $1.00 (or $6.00) in change, claiming that he did not have 20 cents on hand. Kane then was alleged to punch the cab driver in the face, and proceeded to take away the entire taxi fare. Kane and his cousin are now charged for felony robbery and misdemeanour. Kane has entered a “not guilty” plead as of today.

While more recent reports, including one that cites the cab driver’s lawyer, are trying to downplay the incident, and trying to make it sound like it was merely a “minor dispute” that occurred over the fares from the ride, it is indelible that an altercation DID happen and Kane had used excessive force during the incident. The case, in my opinion, would be settled before even going to the court, and charges may be dropped outright, but that does not change the fact that Kane most likely has done something extremely stupid.

Which takes me to my point: how many times have we heard the terms “star athletes” and “crime” linked in a news report? From O.J. Simpson’s murder trial, to Kobe Bryant’s rape accusation, to Michael Vick’s dog-fighting ring, to Michael Phelps’ “bong” incident, to Plaxico Burress’ gun charges, to Kane’s altercation… (I can go on and on) And these are only incidents outside of the playing field/court! Why are we still, as a society, worshipping athletes and other celebrities, and worse yet, teaching our future generation to do the same?

Don’t get me wrong – there are tonnes of athletes and celebrities that are solid citizens, and good role models. Tony Dungy, the retired Indianapolis Colts coach, is an upright man who has set many great examples to others; Jim Abbott, the former California Angels/New York Yankee pitcher, remains an inspiration to people with a physical disability; Warrick Dunn’s story of forgiveness to the murderer of his mother brings tears to fans and non-fans of the Tampa Bay Bucs… I can continue to name these names, but that is not my point.

Fact is, athletes and celebrities are HUMANS, who have their victories and demons. While we should celebrate their victories and cheer for their achievements, we need to keep things in proper prospective. People, in general, should not be worshiped as idols.

When I was a little boy, I read about George Washington to learn of the value of honesty; I read the story of Helen Keller to learn about the value of perseverance; I read the story of Thomas Edison to learn about the importance of an inquiring mind and work ethic… I was never taught to make these much more worthy people my idols (and worse yet, gods). It’s time we return to that when it comes to our celebrities.

MLB is basically a fraud right about now

With the latest report that Boston Red Sox slugger David Ortiz and former Red Sox slugger Manny Ramirez both being on the list of the 100 or so baseball players who tested positive for performance-enhancing drugs (PEDs), I guess one thing is official: Major League Baseball has become a fraud, and I have no time for it anymore, much like I have no time for pro-wrestling.

The thing that disturbs me the most is that Ortiz, who, along with Ramirez, helped the Boston Red Sox to win two World Series to erase the almost-a-century-old curse, was hard-swinging at New York Yankee third baseman Alex Rodriguez just months ago when it was revealed that Rodriguez was using steroids. Ortiz said he would welcome MLB to test him before, during, and after the season. He was the one who said voluntary testing was not enough; he was the one who said people caught cheating should be suspended for a year. He was the one who said the only thing people can find in his blood were “beans and rice.” He was the one who said he would not take any PEDs because he did not want his children to be taunted by classmates who said their father is a cheater…

Basically, Ortiz, like many other MLBers, was caught in a bunch of lies. And right about now, is there anyone who we can trust in baseball anymore? And, can you honestly look at any achievement in baseball, and not think twice as to whether or not that achievement is legitimate? I certainly cannot.

Some people would suggest that if the entire era is ridden with steroids, then there really was not a problem with an un-level playing field. But unless everyone in MLB was cheating from 1994, that take cannot be valid. If any of the pitchers who faced Ortiz or Ramirez in the two Boston World Series win were clean, then the Red Sox had gotten an unfair advantage, and that fact alone would make those epic championships tainted. No bloody socks from Curt Schilling can completely change that fact.

And that’s the sad part in all this. I am sure there are a good number of players who have been grinding it out, paying the price, to play at the top level. But by now, everyone is pretty well “guilty by association.” If you are one of the Red Sox members from those two championship team, who upset would you be to see people throw an asterisk to your accomplishment?

Which prompts me to wonder why people are still unwilling to break that “code” and take a strong stance against the cheaters in baseball. If my entire legacy is about to be put into question, and I’m completely clean, I would be infuriated. But we don’t see that happening in MLB; at least, not frequently.

If MLB and its players are not willing to distant themselves from the frauds and the cheaters once and for all because it is “good for business,” then I will. As a fan, I have no time for Bobble-head figures launching rockets when I know that most of that is drug-fuelled.

MJ and ET

These last 10 days, we have been bombarded with news and rumours surround Michael Jackson’s passing. While there is absolutely no doubt that Michael Jackson is a transcendent figure in the world of entertainment, I cannot but remember his later days and all the controversies and allegations. Is Michael Jackson a legend? Absolutely. Is he worth the wailing and crying that we are seeing daily in the news? Unless you are actually related to him biologically or in relationship, I think not.

Just a couple days before MJ’s passing, a far less prominent person by the name of Ed Thomas suffered a tragic death. The news, however, did not receive much media attention. Here's one though, from ABC news.

Ed Thomas was a long-time high school football coach at Aplington-Parkersburg, a small town in Iowa, USA. He has coached for over 40 years, and from his small high school program, he has produced four professional football players, no small feat for a program so small. On the day Mr. Thomas died, he was putting in extra time for his players, gathering them for an extra training session. A former student from his high school stormed the changing room where Mr. Thomas was, and shot him in front of his players.

Mr. Thomas is a big-name person in the state of Iowa not because of his coaching genius, but because of his character as a person. A couple years ago, a tornado basically destroyed this small town in Iowa. While many considered leaving the town, Mr. Thomas urged the people to stay, and used the re-building of the school’s football field as a rallying cry to help the town’s people to move on.

In many ways, I understand why Mr. Thomas is not getting the respect and tribute that Michael Jackson is getting – after all, Mr. Thomas was “just” a high school football coach that worked with these teenagers, and showed them how to live their lives the right way. But, isn’t that exactly the problem we have in this society, that we celebrate the stars, and don’t recognize those who are truly making the true difference, one life at a time?

Rest in peace, Mr. Thomas. You have my utmost respect.

What Now, Canucks?

The Vancouver Canucks’ aspirations to win a Stanley Cup came to a crashing end on Monday, and though the season is now officially over, a lot of lingering questions remain. You sports fans out there have probably read, discussed, and debated a great deal about some of these topics already. Here’s my two-cents-worth:

Overall Team’s Needs: While these needs are probably needed by every team, in the series against the Blackhawks, they became extremely apparent top priorities for the Canucks: speed on the defence, and a couple of scorers with creativity. Against a team that has average speed, the Canucks defence can play a phenomenal brand of shut-down hockey because everyone is so sound in his positioning. They were exposed against the quicker, puck-moving Chicago forwards, when defencemen could no longer stand around and use their sticks to deflect passes and block shots. In addition, the Canucks’ offence has become very predictable when spearheaded by the Twins. The cycle game works great when the other team is just trying to play the Canucks’ brand of defence, but if you have noticed how many passes were deflected or blocked when the team played Chicago, you’d know that they need some other options.

Mats Sundin: I won’t say Sundin is a bust necessarily, as I believe he brought a swagger to the team that kept the other teams honest when checking the Sedins’ line. Having said that, Sundin also plays a brand of hockey that is similar to that of the Sedins’ line. When dueling it out with a team for a 7-game series, teams can learn how to shut down the same game. In that sense, I don’t think Sundin is the right fit for the Canucks’ future, especially if GM Mike Gillis is intending to bring the twins back.

Mattias Ohlund: I feel saddened that the game’s speed is starting to surpass “Olie’s” game. Ohlund is a great positional player, and his plus/minus rating in the playoffs suggests that he is still playing the game at a fairly high level. It does not appear that he will be back next year; however, my feeling is: if the Canucks can still put a good mix of defencemen together with speed and skills, he should be brought back.

Henrik and Daniel Sedin: They are solid, front-line offensive players who can perform magic on ice. The problem, however, is that they only seem to come together as a package, which would be extremely costly for the Canucks. And though some of the past playoff demons were excised this year, the twins still were unable to serve as the game-breakers when the game is on the line. If the Canucks can get good value for them, I would not feel offended to see them traded.

Roberto Luongo: How soon we forget? After the St. Louis series, Luongo joked about being treated like a demi-god in the city. Six games later, some people are trying to run him out of town. Did Luongo play well against Chicago? No. Is he worth 7+ millions per year when it appears that no single goaltender, not Brodeur, and not Luongo, can single-handedly win a team a game, much less a series anymore? It’s questionable. I think Luongo is still an invaluable asset to the team; the melt-down in the Chicago series has more to do with the lack of speed on the Canucks’ D than Luongo’s ability to “steal” a game. Unless the salary cap’s maximum amount is substantially reduced to a point where it is not viable to keep Luongo, I think it is still a no-brainer that the Canucks should keep him.

Coaching: When the Canucks missed the playoffs in 2008, people question whether coach Alain Vigneault is too “defence first” of a coach. Game 4 against Chicago did not help shake that never-fading feeling in my heart. While “Coach V” has nothing to do with the slow-footed personnel he is given, he still has a tendency to get too conservative when the Canucks have a lead. GM Gillis probably will try to provide the coach with more speed through free agency and drafts – it’s up to Vigneault to prove that he can coach an offensive-minded game.

Needless to say, it will be an interesting spring/summer in Canucksville.

The Great Debate on Markus Naslund

Report out of New York suggests that long-time Vancouver Canuck captain Markus Naslund is set to retire after another disappointing campaign with the New York Rangers. Naslund is 35 years old.

And immediately, be great debate begins again here in Vancouver: should Naslund’s number be retired? If #19 will be retired, Naslund will join Stan Smyl and Trevor Linden as the third Canuck player to have his jersey hung in the rafters.

If we are to look at the stats, Naslund seems to be a prime candidate to have his jersey retired. After all, he is the all-time leader in career points (756) and goals (346), and is third in career assists (410, 5 behind all-time leader Linden). Naslund’s offensive prowess speaks volume, and is, without a doubt, one of the greatest offensive players the Canucks have ever had.

However, to have a player’s number retired goes beyond the stats. Naslund has often been criticized for the fact that he has never taken the Canucks deep into the playoffs. His later years in a Canucks uniform lead some people to question his commitment to the game. Most importantly, people suggest that Naslund was never the “leader” that captivates and inspires a team’s motivation to go above and beyond what it has talent-wise.

While I do not necessarily agree with the above criticisms on Naslund, especially when it comes to the question of leadership, I must say that I am one of those who don’t think Naslund’s number should be retired. And here’s why:

To retire a player’s number means that, that particular number will never be worn by another player playing for the team. To me, the simplest qualifier for this very special treatment is that the player has done something that would not be repeated by another player. Looking back at Stan Smyl’s career and Trevor Linden’s career, I think I am fairly confident in saying that it would be extremely unlikely to have another player repeat what they have contributed to the team on and off the ice. Naslund’s greatest “mark” with the Canucks is his very strong offensive stats; they would not be repeated or surpassed easily by another player, but I will not say that I don’t expect those records to be broken.

Don’t get me wrong – Naslund has been an exceptional player for the Canucks. He has conducted himself humbly and admirably through his 12 seasons in Vancouver. I don’t, for a second, feel that his humility and quiet demeanor should prevent him from receiving the proper recognition to the contributions he has made for the team. However, having a number retired, to me, is very much like being inducted into the hall-of-fame (only at a local level instead of a league or sport level) – if you have to argue and present your points to convince others of a candidate’s legitimacy, then that player, however wonderful a player or person he is, is not quite hall-of-famer (or, in this case, a jersey-retiring player). I would not have a problem seeing Naslund’s number retired, but if it were up to me to decide, I would not retire #19… that’s all.

I personally felt a little saddened that, when Markus Naslund played his last game as a Canuck on the same night that Trevor Linden played his last, there was no recognition for what Naslund has done. But, true to his humble form, Naslund just stood there quietly, and gave Linden the recognition he rightfully deserved. Give Naslund the recognition and honour that he deserves – I just don’t think retiring his jersey is the more suitable recognition.

A-Rod Tipping off Pitches for Self Gain?

The latest accusations directed towards New York Yankees third baseman Alex Rodriguez are even more damning than the initial allegation and eventual admission of steroid use.

According to the text of a soon-to-release book written by sports writer Selena Roberts, “A-Rod’s” steroid use may date back as far as his high school playing time, and extends beyond his Texas Rangers playing days. If proven correct, any remaining credibility Rodriguez had when he admitted to be using the performance-enhancing drugs during his Rangers days to “live up to the expectations” of his lofty contract would be washed away. But this is not the biggest and most damaging accusation yet.

Also in the book, Rodriguez was accused of tipping his pitchers’ pitches in an one-sided game to OPPOSITION PLAYERS in hope to have them return the favour by tipping off their own pitchers’ pitches. This “trade,” obviously, does not affect a team’s win-loss record, but it would definitely benefit Rodriguez’s stats.

There are several reasons why this accusation is so damning:

1) If Rodriguez is tipping opposition batters about his own pitchers’ pitches, he is hurting the livelihood of his own team mates. What if a relief pitcher is barely holding on to his big league job, and A-Rod tips his pitches to an opposition batter so he hits a 3-run homerun against A-Rod’s team mate in a meaningless game? That pitcher may be sent to the minors, and may never be called back again. He is hurting his team mate.

2) What can A-Rod get out of such “trades?” Not a win for his team, that’s for sure. A-Rod may have been accused of never being able to step up to the plate when things matter the most. But if all he cares is his own stats, and he cares about it to a point that he would hurt his team mates to do so, who would respect him in the locker room?

3) A-Rod has long been criticized for being able to hit so well when nothing is on the line. If this accusation is true, then there is a very obvious reason to explain why – not because he does not clamp up when the game’s pressure may get to him, but because he can buy his way to juicy information that would allow him to hit big when nothing is on the line. This puts further damages to his already tainted stats.

Few professionals fall from grace as far and as fast as A-Rod does… but if these accusations are true, then who can he blame but himself?

Further reading:

A-Rod’s Steroids Use Started in School (reported by the Vancouver Province):

Ex-teammate Saddened by Pitch-tipping Allegations (reported by SI.com)

And then there are eight

Props to the NHL’s web designers, who had this very subtle but smart display of the last eight teams that remain in the struggle to Lord Stanley’s Mug: in the front page of NHL.com, they have the thirty team logos displayed at the top, but only the teams that are still alive are in colour. Like I’ve said, subtle, yet smart. (see below, and you'll know what I mean)
I went 5 and 3 in my first round predictions. I am not terribly surprised at the ones I got wrong, but was quite surprised at the way those teams lost: San Jose bowing out in the playoffs again after all the changes and acquisitions they have made to bolster their playoff readiness? Martin Brodeur not being able to shut the door in a game 7? Philadelphia choking away a 3:0 lead at home to lose to their hated rivals Penguins? I didn’t see those coming. (But I guess if I could see all of that coming, and can go 8:0 in my series prediction, I would have been hired as a hockey analyst.)

Anyway, here are the second round match-ups and my predictions:

#1 Detroit vs. #8 Anaheim – After watching the Ducks dismantled the President’s Trophy winner, should they still be considered a #8 seed? Detroit has a wealth of playoff success that San Jose sorely lacks, but for whatever the reason, I still am not buying in. Anaheim in 6.

#3 Vancouver vs. #4 Chicago – Would rust be a problem for the Vancouver Canucks? Despite the fact they swept the Blues in round 1, I am still a little sceptical of the Canucks’ offence. Chicago showed in their first round victory against the Flames that their young guns can play and do not fold under playoff pressure. Luongo will continue to be the difference, but this is no easy walk in the park. Vancouver in 6.

#1 Boston vs. #6 Carolina – Boston’s offence was too strong for the Habs. Carolina is a better team, and Cam Ward is not going to be shaky like Carey Price was. Still, I don’t see anything that would suggest an upset. Boston in 5.

#2 Washington vs. #4 Pittsburgh – I picked the Capitals to beat the Rangers in round 1, and that almost did not happen had the Rangers not self-implode. The Ovechkin-Crosby showdown will be very intriguing, but the difference in the series will come down to the supporting cast and the goaltending. Fleury is not an all-world goalie, but I would trust him over the rookie Valarmov, who had 6 regular season games and 5 playoff games under his belt. Pittsburgh in 6.

Allen Iverson: Answer or Fraud?

Jason Whitlock, a writer who I respect quite a bit, recently wrote an article for Fox Sports titled “No Question, Iverson was Never the Answer.” In the article, Whitlock criticized Detroit Pistons’ guard Allen Iverson (#3 in the picture; he was a Denver Nugget at the time) for quitting on the team, and suggested that winning was never something that was important to him (for the full article, please click on the following link).

Whitlock: No Question, Iverson was Never the Answer

Jason Whitlock has written many articles that are stimulating to the mind. While I do not always agree with what he says nor where he stands, I think his criticism on the problems of African Americans unwittingly trying to live up to the “hood image” is bang on. The Iverson article has some similar notions in it as well, but I would respectfully disagree with Whitlock’s take that winning was never important for Iverson.

Standing at 6’0” and 165 pounds, Iverson never had the chance to be the next Michael Jordan, as Whitlock has pointed out. We all know that Iverson shoots the ball an awful lot, and does not take practice very seriously. I would even go as far as agreeing with Whitlock that Iverson is a soloist who “played both backcourt positions at the same time, leaving his teammates plenty of opportunity to stand around and watch.” I also agree that Iverson does not make his team-mates around him better… BUT…

A player who does not value winning would not throw around his miniature body (relatively speaking, in NBA terms) like Iverson does (as seen in the picture on the left where he drove in for a lay-up against the now defunct Seattle Super Sonics). Watching Iverson over the years, you cannot convince me that he would endure the physical punishment he has received just for the money or for the “street cred.” While I agree that Iverson’s concept about the team is not the “correct” one, I would argue that it is more of a case of a misplaced sense of leadership than one that stems from selfishness.

Similar to Kobe Bryant in his earlier days, Iverson found himself to be the best player on the team. He might have felt that he dribbling all the balls, taking all the shots, and taking all the hits IS the best formula for winning. Kobe did that, but eventually grew out of it. Iverson, sadly, never did, and now, his career is winding down.

Call me naïve, but I do have this sense of empathy for athletes who grew up in a disadvantaged environment and were not taught properly the concept of distributed leadership and team. Iverson was a victim of that; it does not give him an excuse for never growing out of that, but to say he does not want to win, in my opinion anyway, is too harsh a criticism.

He is, to me, an answer… not always the right answer and the best answer, but nonetheless, an answer.

NHL Playoffs First Round Predictions

I used to have a bragging rights tournament with my students when the Stanley Cup playoff rolls around every year. But since I am no longer an enrolling staff, I have to take these predictions online – challenge and better me with your predictions!

Western Conference:
#1 San Jose Sharks vs. #8 Anaheim Ducks: The Sharks have been perennial chokers in the playoffs. With mostly the same personnel, maybe it will happen again, but not against the un-disciplined Ducks. Sharks in 5.

#2 Detroit Red Wings vs. #7 Columbus Blue Jackets: I am thankful that the Jackets are not playing the Canucks. Forget about the fact that Columbus has never played a single playoff game – this team is dangerous. Rick Nash is not a guy I want to face in the playoffs. Chris Osgood in goal for the Wings may just be the defending champs’ downfall, in spite of a well of experience everywhere in the line-up. I will be bold in this one: Wings in 7 (okay, maybe not that bold)

#3 Vancouver Canucks vs. #6 St. Louis Blues: It is time for Luongo to show everyone that he is the top playoff goalie that can carry the team to the promise land. I think Luongo’s chance of getting the #1 goalie job with Team Canada in 2010 relies heavily on how he does. The Canucks’ funky scoring ability worries me, but not enough to doubt Luongo in round 1. Canucks in 6.

#4 Chicago Blackhawks vs. #5 Calgary Flames: Next to the Canucks, the Flames is my favourite team, but this team is stumbling into the playoffs. The Hawks may be young, but they have the “Bulin Wall” that Calgary does not have anymore. Hawks in 5.

Eastern Conference:
#1 Boston Bruins vs. #8 Montreal Canadiens: Other than historical head-to-head records, tell me what the Canadiens have that would allow them to overpower the Bruins? This one will not be pretty for Habs fans. Bruins in 5.

#2 Washington Capitals vs. #7 New York Rangers: Some experts are picking the Rangers to upset the Caps due to Washington’s porous defence. Are they overlooking the Rangers’ anemic offence? (Not to mention: I have hated the Rangers since 1994). Capitals in 6.

#3 New Jersey Devils vs. #6 Carolina Hurricanes: Martin Brodeur and the Devils struggled down the stretch, but I am not betting anything against the all-time leaders in wins recorded by a goalie… at least, not yet. Devils in 6.

#4 Pittsburgh Penguins vs. #5 Philadelphia Flyers: The Penguins have a tonne of fire power, but somehow, they seemed to have taken a step back this year after they went to the Cup finals the year before. The runner-up of the Stanley Cup tournament typically does not fare too well the following year… Flyers in 7.

Let the playoffs begin!

Curt Schilling – MAN!

It was with a sense of sadness, yet a little bit of joy, to hear that long-time MLB pitcher Curt Schilling is retiring after 20 MLB seasons (23 years in professional baseball).

Schilling’s stats are very, very good, though some may argue that they are not “hall-of-fame good”. Of the three major pitching statistical categories, his win-loss record (216-146) and ERA (3.46) are not great. The only category that really stands out is his 3116 career strikeouts – which ranks him 14th in MLB history. In my opinion, however, Schilling is still a first-ballot hall-of-famer, because he has an almost invincible 11-2 record in the post-season. Basically, one can circle Schilling in for a win in the post-season. His NLCS and World Series MVP awards in 1993 and 2001 testify the very fact that Schilling is the pitcher you want to give the ball to when it matters the most.


And who would forget the “bloody sock” from the 2004 playoffs? Playing with a torn tendon that was basically “stapled” together temporarily by sutures, Schilling literally bled his blood on the playing field, and willed the Boston Red Sox to an improbable comeback against the New York Yankees before winning the world series against the St. Louis Cardinals. The World Series win was Boston’s first since 1918, and the image of Schilling’s bloody sock will be remembered for many, many years to come by most baseball fans.

What I respect the most about Curt Schilling though goes beyond his on-field prowess. Schilling is never afraid to speak his mind, and his criticism against baseball players who use performance-enhancing drugs (PEDs) has been sharp and harsh. For example, he has suggested that admitted steroids user Jose Canseco’s records “should be erased,” and that Rogers Clemens, another user of PEDs, should have his Cy Young Awards stripped.

Schilling is bash, and arrogant, and I don’t always agree with what he has to say, but I respect his honesty and frankness. His blog, 38 Pitches, is an insightful blog that is almost always an entertaining read. In his latest entry where he announces his retirement, Curt Schilling had two special thank you’s to give:

“To my Lord and Savior Jesus Christ for granting me the ability to step between the lines for 23 years and compete against the best players in the world.”

“To my wife Shonda and my 4 children, Gehrig, Gabriella, Grant and Garrison for sacrificing their lives and allowing baseball to be mine while I played. Without their unquestioned support I would not have been able to do what I did, or enjoy the life, and I am hopefully going to live long enough to repay them as much as a Father and Husband can.”

Curt Schilling, a man. MLB is a better league because of you. Thank you, and happy retirement!

An Incredible Chess Match on Ice

A little “off topic” here, but this is my blog.

I don’t know about you, but I really like the sport of curling. As my title suggests, I think this is a chess match played on ice. Curling often gets a reputation (fair or unfair, who is to say) to be a game that features people screaming “hard,” “hurry,” “easy,” (this is not meant to be suggestive, but I notice it will be), people carrying brooms and brushes, and people just gliding on ice with these strange-looking shoes. Yes, curling is all of that, but it is also a game of strategies. 

If you have spent any time watching the Scottie’s Tournament of Hearts the last two weeks, you would know what I am talking about. From the first rock thrown by the lead to the final one curled by the skip, curling is a see-saw battle that involves a competition of will and wit, on top of the skills that are required to play the sport well. 

I am especially impressed with the way Team Canada played. Similar to last year, skip Jennifer Jones and her team did not get off to a good start, and was actually on the very brink of being eliminated from playoff contention. But, in exactly the same way as the team did last year, they came back to win a tie-breaker game against PEI to qualify for the playoffs, followed by three straight wins to capture the team’s third national title and a chance to represent Canada at the World Championship. To achieve the feat once is impressive; to achieve the same feat twice is just incredible – it demonstrates that, mentally, this team is impossible to break. 

This incredible mental fortitude can be best explained by their performance against Quebec (I actually missed the championship game against BC, but read that it was even more the case). Taking advantage of Quebec’s sloppy play at the start of the game, Team Canada easily went up 5:0 after just two ends of play. Quebec came back strong in the next two ends and tied the game at 5. Canada went back up 7:5, only to see Quebec tie it again. At that time, Team Canada could have gotten frustrated, rattled, angry, etc., but they did not. The team just somehow felt that they were better, and would prevail no matter what. And they did. Opposition can rattle Team Canada’s confidence; they can frustrate them, but they can seemingly never defeat them. 

The Brier is coming up (that’s the men’s national championship). For those who have not watched curling before, I would strongly suggest that you put in some TV time for the sport – it is easy enough to understand that you don’t need someone to explain the sport to you. Once you get over the screaming and yelling, and see the strategies and mental conflicts that are displayed in the game, I believe you will enjoy the game too.

A-Rod?! A-Fraud!

Just days after Michael Phelps, one of the biggest names in the sports world, is being hit by controversy, another one is hitting the dust as well. Alex Rodriguez (aka A-Rod), arguably the best baseball player in this generation, has admitted to ESPN that he had used performance-enhancing drugs during his days with the Texas Rangers. While the society is still dumb-struck of what Phelps has done, the A-Rod story is quickly taking over in sports radio, news talk, and so on. Michael Phelps is celebrating that he is temporarily off the hook. 

Unlike some of the other names in baseball (Barry Bonds, Mark McGwire, Roger Clemens), Rodriguez came out relatively quickly to admit what he had done, and apologized for his action. He did not try the “I don’t want to talk about the past” card like Mark McGwire, and did not try to intimidate people into not asking him questions like Bonds and Clemens did. Instead, he borrowed a page from the likes of Jason Giambi and Andy Pettitte to somewhat apologize and take ownership of what was done. I guess he would like the public to forgive and forget what he has done, much like how they have treated Giambi and Pettitte. Just the fact that he has apologized, I guess, deserves some credit. 

But the credit stops there. Make this very clear: all of Giambi, Pettitte, and now Rodriguez, are apologizing because they really do not have a better choice. The next baseball player who will publically admit that he has used/is using performance enhancing drugs when there is no allegations/potential charges/indelible evidence about to be leaked would be the first. These players all made a choice to cheat, and would continue to cheat as long as they know they can get away from it. Why are players coming out now about steroid use, and are admitting that they have done it? Because there are reliable tests that can prove, without much of a doubt, that you have used it to make your head five times bigger and your biceps twenty times stronger. There is, to date, no way of testing the use of human growth hormones (HGH) – do you see any player admitting that they are currently using HGH to boost their performances? 

Reports indicated that there were 104 players who tested positive for steroids use prior to the year that steroids use was actually tested. For a league that has between 600 – 700 players, that number is substantial enough that all players are now “guilty by association.” Seriously, can you say, without the shadow of a doubt, that player A, B, or C is clean at this time? Everyone thought Alex Rodriguez was clean, but not anymore… A-Rod was juiced, and probably, many of his peers were as well. There is just no way to know.

The Players, Major League Baseball, and the players’ union have no one to blame but themselves for this credibility crisis. Sure, the media and the fans did not stand up to ask the tough questions during the steroids era when sluggers were suddenly a lot more powerful than they were, but those directly involved are still the ones to blame: the players for using the drugs, the league for turning a blind eye on the situation while their turn-rails were spinning, and the union for doing everything they could to condone this culture of cheating. 

I was a baseball fan in the early 90s, and still follow the sports somewhat closely, but the increasing number of players indicted of cheating has just made the sports less and less appealing to me. If I want to watch fabricated drama, why don’t I just turn onto wrestling? 

Michael Phelps

The recent controversy surrounding Olympic swimmer Michael Phelps is losing momentum now, and, as per usual, this is the time when I chime in (never wanted to be the guy who talks about the same thing that everyone else is talking about).

The incident is once again a reminder that sports heroes, movie stars, politicians, and basically celebrities in general, are no angels and are not really worthy to be worshipped as gods or even as idols. Yes, many have inspiring stories to tell, and many can set examples that we can learn from, but like anyone who has ever lived on this face of the earth, they are not perfect individuals. While I still marvel at Michael Phelps’ incredible prowess in the pool, why should I look beyond the individual of the pool and feel he is somehow a superior being? Superior in the pool? Absolutely? A person to learn from? In certain aspects? Someone to become my god? Absolutely not.

If we can move away from this idol-worshiping state in our society, we’d be disappointed far fewer times, and we actually would be better for it. Some people, in particular, would be much better off growing out of this state where a person is either an angel or a devil. Michael Phelps is a perfect example: he was a great Olympic swimmer in the 2004 Olympics already, and remarkably, he topped the performances of 2004 by making history in 2008. His achievements in the pool are indelibly incredible. Having said that, this is the same guy that was caught in a D.U.I. (driving under influence) incident shortly after the Athens Olympics, and is pictured smoking from a “bong” now in a college party. The body of work is quickly building up to suggest that Phelps’ private life is not one people should be looking up to. Ultimately, he may pay dearly for the choices he is making, but like many other individuals facing choices, he is responsible to his own actions, and outsiders like you and I really should not love or hate him for those choices.

Speaking of outsiders, this brings me to the interesting reactions other athletes had on Phelps. One college swimmer, for example, said “I'm not going to hate him forever, but I don't think that he's the role model everyone makes him out to be…” Hate?! Has he hit a family member of yours? I’m glad you are not going to hate him forever, for if you have to hold a grudge that size towards every celebrity that has done something criminal, you are in BIG trouble…

(Local swimmers express disappointment on Phelps)

Sarcasm aside, the reaction to Phelps’ latest trouble by former Olympic, Canadian snowboarder Ross Rebagliati just made me laugh. “I think Michael Phelps is an incredibly talented athlete and it's a shame the media is choosing to focus and scrutinize one photo taken months ago at a private college party. The guy has 14 Olympic medals.” Rebagliati said. The media is choosing to focus and scrutinize on one photo?! If Phelps was not caught smoking pot, there would be no photo to focus and scrutinize from! The guy has 14 Olympic medals?! What is the relevance? We are talking about a sports celebrity making an extremely poor judgement here. OJ Simpson cannot say that his Heisman Trophy has any bearing on his armed robbery trial! Why is Rebagliati so bent out of shape for Phelps? Oh, I get it now – Rebagliati was himself in the center of controversy in the past when his gold medal was temporarily stripped because of a blood test that showed he has smoked pot. From a pot-smoker to a pot-smoker. Incredible credibility, Ross! Michael Jackson defending a pedophile thinks you should keep your mouth shut.

(Rebagliati defends Phelps: fully story)

Phelps made a mistake. It is not a serious enough crime that he should be crucified for it. But should he be receiving a major public relations backlash? You bet he should. Should he be punished for it? As long as marijuana is an illegal substance, why in the world not?

In Need of a Team, Not a Messiah Figure

The Vancouver Canucks lost an awful, humiliating game last night to the lowly Nashville Predators to extend their pitiful home losing streaks to 8 games. What was so difficult to watch last night was that the Canucks gave up a 3-1 second period lead to surrender 4 unanswered goals (one into an empty net) to choke away what should have been an easy home win (Nashville had only scored 2 or more goals 9 times).

Mats Sundin looked awful. As seen in the report below, he cut several of his shifts short while his linemates were still going. He continued to take lazy penalties. Most importantly, he continues to be a non-factor one month after he signed with the Vancouver Canucks to play less than half a season for 5 million dollars.

http://business.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20090129.WBhockeyblog20090129083353/WBStory/WBhockeyblog

I have never liked the idea of signing Sundin; but because I did not pile on previously, I would not be one saying “I told you so” right now. Still, the concept of bringing in a veteran star as the “messiah” of the hockey club has failed before (hello, Mark Messier!), and is seemingly going to fail again this time around (the Canucks had 1 win since Sundin joined them). It is time management begin to understand the method of doing things just does NOT work, no matter what professional sports you are talking about.

Hockey and football are arguably the most team-oriented sport that relies so heavily on a mutual commitment and ownership of responsibility. With the current parity in both the NHL and the NFL, a “star” can only do you so much. The Dallas Cowboys have a star-studded lineup, and they did not even make the playoffs. The Arizona Cardinals were deemed the “worst-ever playoff team,” and they will be competing for football’s supremacy this Sunday. The difference? A team whose players are committed to one another, are accountable to one another, and would go to war for the sake of the person sitting next to you in the locker room.

I have been a Vancouver Canuck fan for over 20 years, so I gather I can say I know the history of this team quite a bit. Look back at arguably the best-ever Canucks team, the 1994 team that was one goal away from winning the Stanley Cup. Sure, Pavel Bure was a prominent player on that team, but the true heart of that team lied in the likes of Trevor Linden, Kirk McLean, Greg Adams, Cliff Ronning, Geoff Courtnall, Martin Gelinas, Murray Craven, Sergio Momesso, Jyrki Lumme, Gerald Diduck, Dana Murzyn, Bret Hedican… the star player was the game-breaker who can come through for you every now and then, but you need to have a team who will stand up for one another, who would lay their bodies down to make it work.

The current version of the Vancouver Canucks had that same aura before the Sundin signing: Roberto Luongo was the backbone of the team, but he just quietly goes about his business, and so did the rest of the team. Ever since the Sundin signing, it is as if the team adapted the notion that their saviour has arrived, and no one needs to be committed anymore… When a player who has not played for eight months chose to not even skate during the all-star break, the vibe rubs on in the wrong way in the locker room.

Sorry to say this, but I think this season will go down as a bust...

Humble and Classy to the End

I have been talking on and on about Trevor Linden, and this is just another piece.

For those who were not able to watch his retirement ceremony, you have missed something memorable and touching. The whole hour of the ceremony was quite special, but the highlights of the evening were definitely Trevor Linden’s speech, and the raising of his number 16.

Instead of me talking on and on about how humble and classy Trevor Linden is, I think it would be much better off if you hear his speech yourself. The only thing I can say is: from the time he was drafted as an 18-year-old boy to the time he retires as a 38-year-old veteran, Trevor Linden is a team player that puts the welfare of his team above himself. He has always been humble and classy, and represents all of the values we expect in a role model. Congratulations, Trevor Linden!

Trevor Linden’s Speech: Part 1 - starts from 3:30



Trevor Linden’s Speech: Part 2



Trevor Linden and Jersey #16 Officially being Retired: