our misplaced priorities:
As a form of punishment in this country, we routinely sentence criminals to perform community service--they're SENTENCED to community service! Apparently, our social fabric has been woven with a thread of pervasive selfishness. Communtiy service as punishment, damn...chew on that.
Friday, November 24, 2006
Monday, November 20, 2006
Forsberg and the Flyers
(Blogger.com has not been working when trying to input photos.)
So, after reconsidering my previous position on the unlikelihood of the Flyers dealing Forsberg elsewhere[1], I have to say that although not fully sold on the idea, I think it is becoming more of a possibility. Because the more the Flyers solidify their status as basement dwellers this season, and considering Forsberg’s contract expires at the end of it, it’s not outlandish to assume that at some point the front office is going to have to reexamine the way they approach the remainder of the season. (“Reexamining” a mere euphemism for “trade Forsberg.”)
Now, it’s apparent that with the evicting of Bobby Clarke and Ken Hitchcock that, indeed, the front office has been busy reexamining. But if the team’s slide continues, they’re going to have to swallow the realization that, for the first time in over a decade, they ain’t making the playoffs. And with that understanding comes the need to rebuild the team around speed and finesse and youth, which will ultimately yield versatility. (Bye, bye bruisers!)
Ridding of Forsberg will open up salary cap room to spend more freely on lower-priced skaters; his high trade value increases the chances of the Flyers receiving some good talent in return for whom some believe to be the best all-around hockey player to ever lace up the skates. I still don’t truly believe the Flyers trading Forsberg is the best thing—he transcends the conventional image of consistent (when he’s healthy, a problem on its own) and has had no trouble adjusting to the rule changes in the NHL on either side of the puck—but that doesn’t mean they won’t bid farewell to each other. At some point, management will have to make a tough decision: keep Forsberg and hope it all turns around or part ways and look to the future. There are good outcomes from either choice.
No answer is absolute. Although, one solution would be to try to dump marginal players—by trade, or waivers, or flat out cutting them (Kyle Calder's lousy start makes his acquisition questionable)—keep your big guns (Simon Gagne, Mike Richards, et al.) and campaign to resign no. 21 on the basis that the team is going to leave behind its archaic tactics and foster a team that can compete. But to convince Forsberg to stay (if he’s not traded, of course), the Flyers are going to have to take those steps sooner than later; he grows more brittle by the game. But that is a task easier said than done. The Flyers don’t have a wealth of depth to offer in trades that will bring in better talent. Sadly, the Flyers’ only reasonable bargaining chip is Forsberg (isolated even more by Gagne’s pre-season contract extension).
And that will take work. It will take a good general manager who knows the league, has a good reputation and solid relationships with other GMs in the league; but it can happen. This week NHL GMs are meeting in Toronto and you’d be a fool to think Flyers interim-GM Paul Holmgren hasn’t been working the line for potential moves, discussing prospective exchanges for Forsberg.
The Flyers are also in a more advantageous situation than most NHL clubs because they have the luxury of sharing a parking lot with their minor league affiliate. The new NHL has proven that home brewing talent inside the farm system is the best method of team advancement. Cite Buffalo, as almost everyone has, as a case study for effective team development.
The draft is also more important now because the Joe Thorntons and Marion Hossas of the hockey world are retaining their value and teams are becoming reluctant to let them go. The Washington Capitals and the Pittsburgh Penguins have utilized their draft choices better than most, due in part to their horrendous finishes in previous seasons. Regardless, they have made solid draft picks and are now fighting their way back to the post-season promise land.
The Flyers acquired Richards, Jeff Carter and Gagne, while holding later picks. Their amateur scouting crew has to take the reins and adjust from the inside out. If the Sabres and Penguins and Capitals can do it—two teams in small-money markets and one in a city where even apathy loses to indifference—then the Flyers, with their stature in the NHL and bottomless pit of a checkbook, can do it too.
Still, if not Forsberg, then who? Well, one name floating around the NHL has been Forsberg’s and Gagne’s linemate, Mike Knuble. Knuble has enhanced his value since coming to Philadelphia after the lockout. Last year he had a career year with sixty-five points (34 g, 31 a), his prior best being fifty-nine in 2002-2003 with the Boston Bruins. But reservations about Knuble’s offensive production (which is responsible for his worth) are warranted. In his tenth year in the league, and with his fourth team, is Knuble’s offensive surfacing anything more than a result of finding himself at the right side of Peter the Great?
The most obvious flaw in the Flyers’ roster is their lead-footed defense. Writer after writer (including this author) has excoriated Bob Clarke for bringing in the all-but-expired Derian Hatcher and Mike Rathje—collectively, the two have one assist and are -20. But the one defenseman who has rarely, if at all, found himself under the microscope of scrutiny is Joni Pitkanen. A beacon for draft practices that were not Clarke’s regular forte, Pitkanen was chauffeured into the league and portrayed as part of the next generation of NHL blue-liners. But his tendency to rush the puck and his lack of defensive zone awareness routinely put him out of position. Need an example, how about the Flyers’ first overtime loss to the Sabres in the first-round of the 2005-2006 playoffs? Pitkanen, looking like a bush-leaguer, blindly ignored the winger who crept in backdoor and buried the game winner, beginning the end of the Flyers’ season. (Defensemen learn in pee-wee hockey to "swivel" their heads when in front of their own net to stop that exact play!)
Pitkanen is young, mobile, and negotiable—save for his habit of acting like a cat fixated on a ball of yarn. His four years pro experience (three with the Flyers) have proved mediocre. If the opportunity presents itself, Holmgren should jump on it and bring in a more defensive-minded player to seal the cracks Clarke created.
But back top main crux. Does Forsberg leave? Perhaps. Who knows? Forsberg is like the great players of hockey—Gretzky, Mario, Messier, and in a few years, Sidney Crosby—he makes those around him better. The Flyers, whose lack of goal scoring is confounding (ahead of only the Columbus Blue Jackets in goals for), would be wise to consider the repercussions of shipping the one player who is always scoring and helping his teammates do the same. But smarter NHL columnists with incredible access suggest Forsberg’s departure is imminent (Google “E.J. Hradek”). Either way, stay or go, the Flyers are in a mess. Fortunately, for them, it’s fixable.
[1]: A position first vocalized around the office water cooler, it consisted of steadfast adherence that the Flyers will definitely not trade Forsberg to help revamp the team. It sounded something like, "You don’t rid of your best player after a shoddy first-third of a season to try and salvage the remainder. Accepting your playoff-less fate and rebuild for next year, yes, but not now."
So, after reconsidering my previous position on the unlikelihood of the Flyers dealing Forsberg elsewhere[1], I have to say that although not fully sold on the idea, I think it is becoming more of a possibility. Because the more the Flyers solidify their status as basement dwellers this season, and considering Forsberg’s contract expires at the end of it, it’s not outlandish to assume that at some point the front office is going to have to reexamine the way they approach the remainder of the season. (“Reexamining” a mere euphemism for “trade Forsberg.”)
Now, it’s apparent that with the evicting of Bobby Clarke and Ken Hitchcock that, indeed, the front office has been busy reexamining. But if the team’s slide continues, they’re going to have to swallow the realization that, for the first time in over a decade, they ain’t making the playoffs. And with that understanding comes the need to rebuild the team around speed and finesse and youth, which will ultimately yield versatility. (Bye, bye bruisers!)
Ridding of Forsberg will open up salary cap room to spend more freely on lower-priced skaters; his high trade value increases the chances of the Flyers receiving some good talent in return for whom some believe to be the best all-around hockey player to ever lace up the skates. I still don’t truly believe the Flyers trading Forsberg is the best thing—he transcends the conventional image of consistent (when he’s healthy, a problem on its own) and has had no trouble adjusting to the rule changes in the NHL on either side of the puck—but that doesn’t mean they won’t bid farewell to each other. At some point, management will have to make a tough decision: keep Forsberg and hope it all turns around or part ways and look to the future. There are good outcomes from either choice.
No answer is absolute. Although, one solution would be to try to dump marginal players—by trade, or waivers, or flat out cutting them (Kyle Calder's lousy start makes his acquisition questionable)—keep your big guns (Simon Gagne, Mike Richards, et al.) and campaign to resign no. 21 on the basis that the team is going to leave behind its archaic tactics and foster a team that can compete. But to convince Forsberg to stay (if he’s not traded, of course), the Flyers are going to have to take those steps sooner than later; he grows more brittle by the game. But that is a task easier said than done. The Flyers don’t have a wealth of depth to offer in trades that will bring in better talent. Sadly, the Flyers’ only reasonable bargaining chip is Forsberg (isolated even more by Gagne’s pre-season contract extension).
And that will take work. It will take a good general manager who knows the league, has a good reputation and solid relationships with other GMs in the league; but it can happen. This week NHL GMs are meeting in Toronto and you’d be a fool to think Flyers interim-GM Paul Holmgren hasn’t been working the line for potential moves, discussing prospective exchanges for Forsberg.
The Flyers are also in a more advantageous situation than most NHL clubs because they have the luxury of sharing a parking lot with their minor league affiliate. The new NHL has proven that home brewing talent inside the farm system is the best method of team advancement. Cite Buffalo, as almost everyone has, as a case study for effective team development.
The draft is also more important now because the Joe Thorntons and Marion Hossas of the hockey world are retaining their value and teams are becoming reluctant to let them go. The Washington Capitals and the Pittsburgh Penguins have utilized their draft choices better than most, due in part to their horrendous finishes in previous seasons. Regardless, they have made solid draft picks and are now fighting their way back to the post-season promise land.
The Flyers acquired Richards, Jeff Carter and Gagne, while holding later picks. Their amateur scouting crew has to take the reins and adjust from the inside out. If the Sabres and Penguins and Capitals can do it—two teams in small-money markets and one in a city where even apathy loses to indifference—then the Flyers, with their stature in the NHL and bottomless pit of a checkbook, can do it too.
Still, if not Forsberg, then who? Well, one name floating around the NHL has been Forsberg’s and Gagne’s linemate, Mike Knuble. Knuble has enhanced his value since coming to Philadelphia after the lockout. Last year he had a career year with sixty-five points (34 g, 31 a), his prior best being fifty-nine in 2002-2003 with the Boston Bruins. But reservations about Knuble’s offensive production (which is responsible for his worth) are warranted. In his tenth year in the league, and with his fourth team, is Knuble’s offensive surfacing anything more than a result of finding himself at the right side of Peter the Great?
The most obvious flaw in the Flyers’ roster is their lead-footed defense. Writer after writer (including this author) has excoriated Bob Clarke for bringing in the all-but-expired Derian Hatcher and Mike Rathje—collectively, the two have one assist and are -20. But the one defenseman who has rarely, if at all, found himself under the microscope of scrutiny is Joni Pitkanen. A beacon for draft practices that were not Clarke’s regular forte, Pitkanen was chauffeured into the league and portrayed as part of the next generation of NHL blue-liners. But his tendency to rush the puck and his lack of defensive zone awareness routinely put him out of position. Need an example, how about the Flyers’ first overtime loss to the Sabres in the first-round of the 2005-2006 playoffs? Pitkanen, looking like a bush-leaguer, blindly ignored the winger who crept in backdoor and buried the game winner, beginning the end of the Flyers’ season. (Defensemen learn in pee-wee hockey to "swivel" their heads when in front of their own net to stop that exact play!)
Pitkanen is young, mobile, and negotiable—save for his habit of acting like a cat fixated on a ball of yarn. His four years pro experience (three with the Flyers) have proved mediocre. If the opportunity presents itself, Holmgren should jump on it and bring in a more defensive-minded player to seal the cracks Clarke created.
But back top main crux. Does Forsberg leave? Perhaps. Who knows? Forsberg is like the great players of hockey—Gretzky, Mario, Messier, and in a few years, Sidney Crosby—he makes those around him better. The Flyers, whose lack of goal scoring is confounding (ahead of only the Columbus Blue Jackets in goals for), would be wise to consider the repercussions of shipping the one player who is always scoring and helping his teammates do the same. But smarter NHL columnists with incredible access suggest Forsberg’s departure is imminent (Google “E.J. Hradek”). Either way, stay or go, the Flyers are in a mess. Fortunately, for them, it’s fixable.
[1]: A position first vocalized around the office water cooler, it consisted of steadfast adherence that the Flyers will definitely not trade Forsberg to help revamp the team. It sounded something like, "You don’t rid of your best player after a shoddy first-third of a season to try and salvage the remainder. Accepting your playoff-less fate and rebuild for next year, yes, but not now."
Tuesday, October 17, 2006
The house that Havlat (might) build
It’s early in the season, but that’s ok if you’re the Chicago Blackhawks and were hoping your off-season transactions would yield immediate dividends. Just four games into the season, the Blackhawks are sitting in fourth place in the Central Division. With two wins and as many losses thus far, the team is certainly not starting out as hot as its star winger, Martin Havlat. Havlat, who came to Chicago from the Ottawa Senators, has blazed through his first four games, tallying 10 points—sitting atop the league lead in goals (six) with the New York Rangers’ Brendan Shanahan, and tied for best in points with Shanny’s teammate Jaromir Jagr.
Havlat, who turned 25 last April, exemplifies the speedy- and finesse-style of play that the NHL had hoped to facilitate and celebrate when it altered the rules prior to last season. However, Havlat didn’t have much of a chance to shine last year; he missed 58 games to a shoulder injury, along with five more from a suspension. But when he did play, he produced, scoring nine goals and sixteen points in a shortened season that saw the Sens ousted by the Buffalo Sabres in the second-round of the 2005-2006 playoffs.
This is the year Havlat needs to prove to the Blackhawks and the rest of the NHL that he can deliver league-leading points consistently, under pressure, and is worth the three-year, $18 million contract he inked in July. The Czech native, a restricted free-agent, had initially hoped to sign a one-year deal with Ottawa so he could test the free-agent market next summer. Unwilling to accept that as a reasonable request, Ottawa shipped Havlat to Chicago in a three-way deal that included the San Jose Sharks. San Jose traded defensemen Tom Preissing and Josh Hennessy to Chicago for Mark Bell, culminating with the Blackhawks moving Preissing and Hennessy, defenseman Michal Barinka, and a 2008 second-round draft pick to the Senators in exchange for Havlat and forward Bryan Smolinski.
Even though Havlat missed two-thirds of last season, the Senators’ proclivity for ceaseless scoring from stars Dany Heatley and captain Daniel Alfredsson, and up-and-comers Jason Spezza and Patrick Eaves, hardly diminished during last year’s campaign; it is doubtful the Sens will suffer severely from Havlat’s departure. (Even though they’re currently below .500 in the Northeast Division.) Chicago, conversely, will certainly reap the benefits from a player who has a penchant for highlight reel goals. Acquiring a pure offensive talent like Havlat will deepen the Blackhawks’ shallow scoring pool.
The Blackhawks have only reached the post-season once in the last eight seasons, losing in the conference quarterfinals in 2002. Havlat will be a vital component in breaking that streak, and he’s already proven he can put points on the board when it counts. (His 13 points in 10 playoff games last year, and 23 career game winning goals are evidence of that.)
Since his rookie year in 2000-2001, Havlat’s scoring has increased steadily with each season—with the exception of last year, of course. It is unlikely he’ll continue the offensive pace he’s kept so early in this season, but if he can stay healthy, Havlat’s production will surely evade heavy scrutiny. Regardless of his offensive consistency, the real wager rests on Havlat’s explosive temper. Not one to think about his actions prior to committing them, Havlat has routinely been penalized for retaliating and has a steep history of suspensions.
He was criticized in the 2003 playoffs by Philadelphia Flyers coach Ken Hitchcock for his stick-work. In an incident later the next season, Hitchcock said that "somebody is going to make him eat his lunch"—clearly displaying the frustration that Havlat can create even when he doesn’t have the puck. During the 2003-2004 season he was suspended twice, once for kicking and once for high-sticking the Flyers’ Mark Recchi. Havlat was then suspended again on October 17, 2005 for five games after another kicking incident involving Boston Bruins defenseman Hal Gill.
If Havlat doesn’t avoid overreacting, taking cheap shots and retaliatory penalties, he’s going to have a tough time finding a team who will offer the money he wants when his deal with Chicago expires. If he fails to calm down during the interim, he can simplify his opponents’ game plan—antagonize Havlat until he takes a stupid penalty. But after only four games, Havlat has just six penalty minutes (compared to that of NHL penalty-in-minutes leader Matthew Barnaby’s 30)—not too bad for a player averaging more than 20 minutes of ice time per game. It’s probably safe to assume that Chicago GM Dale Tallon addressed those concerns when negotiating for Havlat.
Still, another factor that may play a role in Havlat’s success in his new home is how he handles being Chicago’s go-to guy. In Ottawa, there was such abundant offensive talent that no one player had to provide the bulk of the scoring. Even the Sens’ defense had offensive power in since-traded-to-Boston Zdeno Chara and the contract-extended Wade Redden. The same is not so in the Windy City, where big names are as scarce as the Blackhawks’ recent post-season appearances.
Yet, if he can curtail his volatility and injury woes, the only hindrance that could prevent Havlat from having a career year will be the Blackhawks’ lack of depth, which was not ameliorated when they dealt their leading scorer from last season, Kyle Calder, to the Philadelphia Flyers. (Calder had 59 points in 05-06 versus Michael Handzus’s 44, who came over from Philly.) Their other top scorers are Handzus and Radim Vrbata, both Havlat’s linemates. If the rest of the team struggles to produce, coach Trent Yawney may have to dilute that line to balance out the scoring, a move that could backfire if Havlat proves to be the only reason Handzus and Vrbata are scoring in the first place.
In the end, Havlat has all the requisites to be Chi-town’s finest: the speed, the scoring touch, a keen awareness of his teammates on the rink, and respect in his locker room. How Havlat operates with such a burden remains to be seen. And at this point, no one can know if relying on Havlat alone will translate into a playoff birth. But if he plays like he has throughout the next 78 games, Havlat might get a first-round match up at the United Center as a birthday gift next April.
Havlat, who turned 25 last April, exemplifies the speedy- and finesse-style of play that the NHL had hoped to facilitate and celebrate when it altered the rules prior to last season. However, Havlat didn’t have much of a chance to shine last year; he missed 58 games to a shoulder injury, along with five more from a suspension. But when he did play, he produced, scoring nine goals and sixteen points in a shortened season that saw the Sens ousted by the Buffalo Sabres in the second-round of the 2005-2006 playoffs.
This is the year Havlat needs to prove to the Blackhawks and the rest of the NHL that he can deliver league-leading points consistently, under pressure, and is worth the three-year, $18 million contract he inked in July. The Czech native, a restricted free-agent, had initially hoped to sign a one-year deal with Ottawa so he could test the free-agent market next summer. Unwilling to accept that as a reasonable request, Ottawa shipped Havlat to Chicago in a three-way deal that included the San Jose Sharks. San Jose traded defensemen Tom Preissing and Josh Hennessy to Chicago for Mark Bell, culminating with the Blackhawks moving Preissing and Hennessy, defenseman Michal Barinka, and a 2008 second-round draft pick to the Senators in exchange for Havlat and forward Bryan Smolinski.
Even though Havlat missed two-thirds of last season, the Senators’ proclivity for ceaseless scoring from stars Dany Heatley and captain Daniel Alfredsson, and up-and-comers Jason Spezza and Patrick Eaves, hardly diminished during last year’s campaign; it is doubtful the Sens will suffer severely from Havlat’s departure. (Even though they’re currently below .500 in the Northeast Division.) Chicago, conversely, will certainly reap the benefits from a player who has a penchant for highlight reel goals. Acquiring a pure offensive talent like Havlat will deepen the Blackhawks’ shallow scoring pool.
The Blackhawks have only reached the post-season once in the last eight seasons, losing in the conference quarterfinals in 2002. Havlat will be a vital component in breaking that streak, and he’s already proven he can put points on the board when it counts. (His 13 points in 10 playoff games last year, and 23 career game winning goals are evidence of that.)
Since his rookie year in 2000-2001, Havlat’s scoring has increased steadily with each season—with the exception of last year, of course. It is unlikely he’ll continue the offensive pace he’s kept so early in this season, but if he can stay healthy, Havlat’s production will surely evade heavy scrutiny. Regardless of his offensive consistency, the real wager rests on Havlat’s explosive temper. Not one to think about his actions prior to committing them, Havlat has routinely been penalized for retaliating and has a steep history of suspensions.
He was criticized in the 2003 playoffs by Philadelphia Flyers coach Ken Hitchcock for his stick-work. In an incident later the next season, Hitchcock said that "somebody is going to make him eat his lunch"—clearly displaying the frustration that Havlat can create even when he doesn’t have the puck. During the 2003-2004 season he was suspended twice, once for kicking and once for high-sticking the Flyers’ Mark Recchi. Havlat was then suspended again on October 17, 2005 for five games after another kicking incident involving Boston Bruins defenseman Hal Gill.
If Havlat doesn’t avoid overreacting, taking cheap shots and retaliatory penalties, he’s going to have a tough time finding a team who will offer the money he wants when his deal with Chicago expires. If he fails to calm down during the interim, he can simplify his opponents’ game plan—antagonize Havlat until he takes a stupid penalty. But after only four games, Havlat has just six penalty minutes (compared to that of NHL penalty-in-minutes leader Matthew Barnaby’s 30)—not too bad for a player averaging more than 20 minutes of ice time per game. It’s probably safe to assume that Chicago GM Dale Tallon addressed those concerns when negotiating for Havlat.
Still, another factor that may play a role in Havlat’s success in his new home is how he handles being Chicago’s go-to guy. In Ottawa, there was such abundant offensive talent that no one player had to provide the bulk of the scoring. Even the Sens’ defense had offensive power in since-traded-to-Boston Zdeno Chara and the contract-extended Wade Redden. The same is not so in the Windy City, where big names are as scarce as the Blackhawks’ recent post-season appearances.
Yet, if he can curtail his volatility and injury woes, the only hindrance that could prevent Havlat from having a career year will be the Blackhawks’ lack of depth, which was not ameliorated when they dealt their leading scorer from last season, Kyle Calder, to the Philadelphia Flyers. (Calder had 59 points in 05-06 versus Michael Handzus’s 44, who came over from Philly.) Their other top scorers are Handzus and Radim Vrbata, both Havlat’s linemates. If the rest of the team struggles to produce, coach Trent Yawney may have to dilute that line to balance out the scoring, a move that could backfire if Havlat proves to be the only reason Handzus and Vrbata are scoring in the first place.
In the end, Havlat has all the requisites to be Chi-town’s finest: the speed, the scoring touch, a keen awareness of his teammates on the rink, and respect in his locker room. How Havlat operates with such a burden remains to be seen. And at this point, no one can know if relying on Havlat alone will translate into a playoff birth. But if he plays like he has throughout the next 78 games, Havlat might get a first-round match up at the United Center as a birthday gift next April.
Wednesday, October 4, 2006
Steven Kotler, a myth and some waves: A review
Peppering the backsides of hardback covers are to-be-expected applauses lauding a piece of riveting literature as the next best thing since the last book about the same subject. Steven Kotler’s newest page turner, West of Jesus: Surfing, Science and the Origins of Belief (Bloomsbury; 261 pages), is not altogether different. The rear end is lined with quotes from people who may know what they are talking about. But the difference is in the story; Kotler’s isn’t one that has been told before. Certainly, books have been written about how triumph over disease has lead to miraculous transformations in physical, spiritual and mental strength, it’s just that none of them have been for surfers.
From the onset, Kotler—whose Lyme disease, loss of a perfect job and lady has mired him in a stuck-in-a-rut mentality—does not hide his borderline apathy towards life. “I was little amazed that life was nothing more than an accumulation of days,” he opines, in what shouldn't be misconstrued as whiny or trivial. Others might relinquish the same shame if they had to carry a notebook filled with reminders and instructions about how to turn on a computer and not jump out of windows. Yet, after quickly disclosing the premise of the author's heavy mileage surfing trip, you might expect the rest of the book to be a self-indulgent reflection of spirituality and mortality that will leave you asking what makes this guy’s problems so damn important. Until the unexpected arrives.
Sure, it can easily be argued that Kotler’s reasons for writing about a venture taken for himself are innately selfish. But his dives into surfing's mysticism involve the types of experiences that surfers have been having for years. Kotler simply has the chance (and the budget) to explore the questionable spirituality that thousands of wave riders before him never articulated clearly. His story is our story, really, as surfers looking for answers to the unanswerable. Is it a religion? If so, beneath what deity? Do surfers have a keener understanding of, a more developed relationship with, Mother Nature in all her otherworldly splendor? Who knows? Kotler doesn’t and neither do we, which makes his pursuit easy to follow. His attempt at answers is made for all of our questions.
West of Jesus begins with Kotler’s acceptance that his life sucks, at least recently. Defining himself as “the kind of person who went to places hard to get to and far away,” Kotler boards a plane and a bumpy car ride to Costa Azul, Mexico, in a proactive step to start living the life he had been “choosing not to live.” In between almost drowning and answering calls from editors, Kotler wrote, surfed, and had three articles denied. In what had ideally been an escape for the better, he’s sent to the back of life's line, again, “wondering where [his] life had gone.” After his return from Mexico, however, calls are made, waves are ridden, the Conductor’s story is heard twice in as many locations, and the search for the source of this surfer’s myth begins.
The Conductor’s is a story of two bros “on an epic surf quest who get lost near the ass-end of nowhere and meet some guy who could control the weather and conduct the waves with some kind of baton made from human bone.” That is merely Kotler’s abridged version, expanded upon for pages and pages later in the text. He treks across the globe in hopes of rooting out the origins of the myth. It seems perplexing until readers remember that the guy’s life was a wipeout. At that point, any motivation was good reason. And traveling around the globe to world-class surf spots and getting pitted in waves that most surfers can’t even fathom, all under the guise of research for an article about potential hearsay, doesn’t seem like a bad reason to say "fuck Lyme disease."
Kotler tells a good story, colorfully adorning what may sound like scientific droning. The man clearly did his homework for the other two-thirds of the book’s content: science and religion, seasoned with flavorful history. His explanations of the alluvial sandbars that form from out-flowing rivers that create the perfect barrels at pointbreaks like Rincon in Santa Barbara, California, are accompanied by surfer jargon (“Reefbreak is a fancy way of saying lots of rock underwater”), random historical references (“[In 1988] a man named A.J. Hackett opened the world’s first commercial bungee jump operation”), and religious inferences (Siddhartha, Moses and Jesus were all unhappy, apparently). Surfers or not, readers are going to close Kotler’s book knowing more odd shit than they did before they opened it.
For all the marvelous knowledge and detail that spews like the whitewash of a closeout wave, West of Jesus’ main flaw is that it can be tiresome. Whether it’s the somewhat excessive use of quotes—be it Joan Didion, Ernest Hemingway, Tom Waits, or the efficacious Hunter Thompson—or the lengthy commentary on out-of-body experiences and Dr. Melvin Morse’s research on the topic from 1982, Kotler loads the book with so much to retain that it can harbor fleeting focus. It’s not that it shouldn’t necessarily be included—indeed, the opposite helps Kotler avoid the apocryphal—it’s that more of Kotler himself would make all the sporadic intervals of facts easier to regurgitate at a dinner party. Including more forgettable rambling (just a little) may help us remember the unforgettable. Nonetheless, Kotler diminishes the tediousness by smoothly returning to the exposition that launched him on his tangent.
Ultimately, West of Jesus's lasting quality will be its satiability: calming landlocked surfers frustrated from what Kotler defines as acute “surf-withdrawal.” The book strikes all the subtitles with attention to detail and sufficient relevance. Surfers will find its value in the life and death accounts of Kotler surfing some of the world’s premium breaks. Others will find it in the plethora of random facts and mythical interpretations that involve peoples, places, and cultures from unfamiliar parts of the world. Some may even emerge questioning their spirituality. (A subtle goal of Kotler’s?) Regardless, West is 260 pages of reading that, although targeted to a specific sect of enthusiasts, easily satisfies the intellectual palate of those without access to junky waves on random coasts but have ready links to Amazon.com.
Find Kotler’s book here, also access the book's own Myspace site.
From the onset, Kotler—whose Lyme disease, loss of a perfect job and lady has mired him in a stuck-in-a-rut mentality—does not hide his borderline apathy towards life. “I was little amazed that life was nothing more than an accumulation of days,” he opines, in what shouldn't be misconstrued as whiny or trivial. Others might relinquish the same shame if they had to carry a notebook filled with reminders and instructions about how to turn on a computer and not jump out of windows. Yet, after quickly disclosing the premise of the author's heavy mileage surfing trip, you might expect the rest of the book to be a self-indulgent reflection of spirituality and mortality that will leave you asking what makes this guy’s problems so damn important. Until the unexpected arrives.
Sure, it can easily be argued that Kotler’s reasons for writing about a venture taken for himself are innately selfish. But his dives into surfing's mysticism involve the types of experiences that surfers have been having for years. Kotler simply has the chance (and the budget) to explore the questionable spirituality that thousands of wave riders before him never articulated clearly. His story is our story, really, as surfers looking for answers to the unanswerable. Is it a religion? If so, beneath what deity? Do surfers have a keener understanding of, a more developed relationship with, Mother Nature in all her otherworldly splendor? Who knows? Kotler doesn’t and neither do we, which makes his pursuit easy to follow. His attempt at answers is made for all of our questions.
West of Jesus begins with Kotler’s acceptance that his life sucks, at least recently. Defining himself as “the kind of person who went to places hard to get to and far away,” Kotler boards a plane and a bumpy car ride to Costa Azul, Mexico, in a proactive step to start living the life he had been “choosing not to live.” In between almost drowning and answering calls from editors, Kotler wrote, surfed, and had three articles denied. In what had ideally been an escape for the better, he’s sent to the back of life's line, again, “wondering where [his] life had gone.” After his return from Mexico, however, calls are made, waves are ridden, the Conductor’s story is heard twice in as many locations, and the search for the source of this surfer’s myth begins.
The Conductor’s is a story of two bros “on an epic surf quest who get lost near the ass-end of nowhere and meet some guy who could control the weather and conduct the waves with some kind of baton made from human bone.” That is merely Kotler’s abridged version, expanded upon for pages and pages later in the text. He treks across the globe in hopes of rooting out the origins of the myth. It seems perplexing until readers remember that the guy’s life was a wipeout. At that point, any motivation was good reason. And traveling around the globe to world-class surf spots and getting pitted in waves that most surfers can’t even fathom, all under the guise of research for an article about potential hearsay, doesn’t seem like a bad reason to say "fuck Lyme disease."
Kotler tells a good story, colorfully adorning what may sound like scientific droning. The man clearly did his homework for the other two-thirds of the book’s content: science and religion, seasoned with flavorful history. His explanations of the alluvial sandbars that form from out-flowing rivers that create the perfect barrels at pointbreaks like Rincon in Santa Barbara, California, are accompanied by surfer jargon (“Reefbreak is a fancy way of saying lots of rock underwater”), random historical references (“[In 1988] a man named A.J. Hackett opened the world’s first commercial bungee jump operation”), and religious inferences (Siddhartha, Moses and Jesus were all unhappy, apparently). Surfers or not, readers are going to close Kotler’s book knowing more odd shit than they did before they opened it.
For all the marvelous knowledge and detail that spews like the whitewash of a closeout wave, West of Jesus’ main flaw is that it can be tiresome. Whether it’s the somewhat excessive use of quotes—be it Joan Didion, Ernest Hemingway, Tom Waits, or the efficacious Hunter Thompson—or the lengthy commentary on out-of-body experiences and Dr. Melvin Morse’s research on the topic from 1982, Kotler loads the book with so much to retain that it can harbor fleeting focus. It’s not that it shouldn’t necessarily be included—indeed, the opposite helps Kotler avoid the apocryphal—it’s that more of Kotler himself would make all the sporadic intervals of facts easier to regurgitate at a dinner party. Including more forgettable rambling (just a little) may help us remember the unforgettable. Nonetheless, Kotler diminishes the tediousness by smoothly returning to the exposition that launched him on his tangent.
Ultimately, West of Jesus's lasting quality will be its satiability: calming landlocked surfers frustrated from what Kotler defines as acute “surf-withdrawal.” The book strikes all the subtitles with attention to detail and sufficient relevance. Surfers will find its value in the life and death accounts of Kotler surfing some of the world’s premium breaks. Others will find it in the plethora of random facts and mythical interpretations that involve peoples, places, and cultures from unfamiliar parts of the world. Some may even emerge questioning their spirituality. (A subtle goal of Kotler’s?) Regardless, West is 260 pages of reading that, although targeted to a specific sect of enthusiasts, easily satisfies the intellectual palate of those without access to junky waves on random coasts but have ready links to Amazon.com.
Find Kotler’s book here, also access the book's own Myspace site.
Tuesday, August 8, 2006
SURFING: The one that got away (for now)
In roughly a month, the Boost Mobile Pro will be storming the beaches of north county San Diego.[1] This yearly stop on pro surfing’s World Championship Tour (WCT) draws thousands to the water’s edge of Lower Trestles in San Clemente, California. Ask the locals who owns it, and Orange County chargers will likely scoff at any map of San Diego County, claiming Lowers as all theirs.
Last year’s winner was then soon-to-be-seventh-time WCT Champ Kelly Slater. It was quite the show. How do I know? Because I was there. After parking in the lots up near the 5 freeway, we hiked about 200 yards down a low grade trail, tight roped the railroad tracks, and scurried over to the beach where as many ages were present as grains of sand. Upon arriving at the event, Aussie Mick Fanning was ripping a six or seven foot, glassy right. With blurring speed, he abused the wave with a mix of bottom turns, lip kicks, and cut backs, only to further embarrass it with an ending floater--essentially carving his name as the wave closed out. Fanning didn’t win, obviously, but he provided quite an exciting exit.
What often goes unnoticed at an event held at a spot like Trestles is the high caliber of surfing going on out of the contest’s bounds. True, California beaches are already suffering from dangerously overcrowded lineups. Still, spectators tunneling their focus to the pros alone run the risk of missing out on some spectacular amateur talent that is ripping lines north and south of Lowers. The wizardry some of the nobodies in the local surf communities offer the wandering eye easily force one to question the rules limiting the WCT pool to forty-five.
Since returning east last fall due to a withering bank account, that is what I miss the most. Aside from the actual surfing itself, which I usually partook in twice a day for two straight months, the soaring chances that I’d witness some paper-pusher by day cramming in a session over his lunch is something that never gets old. At Tourmaline, a mediocre, beginner's spot just north of San Diego’s Pacific Beach, there used to be this old lady; she was better than me and my friends and she was operating on a body whose parts were pushing the mid-60s. Then there's the astonishingly mobile Jesse Billauer, who after a being served a cold dish of paralysis in the early 2000s, has grown to Machado-like stature in the surf world by getting back out in the water and riding as though his surfboard was more effective than his wheel chair. Locating that type of longevity in any other sport is practically unheard of, to see it so frequently gives a keen appreciation for the act of surfing. The absence of any number of average people who are superb on a surfboard--long or short, standing or not--is a gap hardly filled by visiting the local tennis court.
Learning to surf, surfing everyday, and then leaving an environment conducive to sustaining the habit is like breathing under water. It can’t be done. You do all in your power to return to the surface and, until you do, death gradually strangles you a little more with each passing second. Explaining this to any non-surfer is useless. It’s not an experience comparable to any other. Even before I’d actually started surfing--when I was watching videos and reading the mags--I didn’t understand it. It wasn’t until I became a surfer, until I caught the bug, that I realized that there’s nothing in the world like it and it’s irreplaceable. Like Kelly Slater said in Dana Brown's 2002 documentary Step Into Liquid, “Once you’re a surfer you’re hooked…you’re done…it’s like the mob or something.”
So, here’s to all those surfers--landlocked, trying to get back to the lineup--hoping to catch just another ride away from the oppressions of the concrete jungle. To those whose feel like they’ve lost a best friend: I feel you. Keep working towards any coast, hopefully we’ll meet in the water soon.
[1]: a local colloquialism used to distinct those from San Diego/La Jolla areas and those from closer to Orange County.
Friday, June 30, 2006
A hindsight outlook at the NHL
The NHL season is finally over! After an 82-game regular season plus eight arduous playoff series, one might suspect that the culmination of the 2005-2006 season would be eagerly anticipated, if not a welcomed relief. However, this season was filled with pure, electric excitement. From the increase in offensive production to the off-ice deals, the playoff quarrels between coaches to the surprise run of the Edmonton Oilers, 2005-2006 was the comeback season the NHL needed to help restore its image and make amends with its alienated fans with a supremely enhanced product.
The games were fast paced and kept that way with adherence to the time restraints imposed by the NHL on face-offs and prohibiting line changes by teams that rely on icing the puck as a way out of a tough defensive struggle. Officiating was consistent from the drop of the first puck last October to the final buzzer of Game 7 at RBC Center a week ago Monday.
In its initial planning stages and rule changing discussions, it’s unlikely that the NHL’s owners and front office big wigs had expected the season to be such a success, regardless of their intention. The reality that hockey was- and still is in some markets- the least popular of the unpopular sports, could not have provided a copious supply of optimism at the onset of this past season. Now that it has, the challenge becomes figuring out the appropriate steps to make sure it remains at a high level, ensuring that its first post-lockout year was not a fluke and that skillful displays of hockey excellence are now the norm.
Considering that most fans and analysts conclude that this season was successful beyond expectations, there will be great speculation during the summer about how teams will revamp for next year.
Just over a week removed from the Finals and a few days from the entry draft in the beacon of British Columbia, let’s take a look at some of the interesting goings on in the NHL:
First and foremost: The Stanley Cup Finals
The completion of the first round of the playoffs made for an interesting remainder. In the East, the top four teams in the conference moved onto their respective semi-final match-ups. In the West, it was the bottom four. Out of those eight teams, the rankings indicated that Carolina, then number two in the East, would be a reasonable prediction to reach the Cup Finals.
Conversely, out of the Western Conference’s basement, Edmonton was surely not. But when the teams lined up in Game 1, there was the Oil, refusing to allow their eighth seed to imply immediate defeat at the hands of the second.
And what a series it was. It appeared as though the morning after a 5-4 loss to Carolina and an even bigger loss of goalie Dwayne Roloson to a stomach turning knee injury, everyone in the hockey world had written off Edmonton. However, Edmonton failed to get the memo- although the shellacking Carolina gave them in Game 2 did nothing to smother the naysayers.
But amid the uncertainty and constant scrutiny, the Oilers played with an unrelenting sense of urgency after their Game 2 disaster. They made it a series in which both teams had a chance with no discernible “better” team.
That being said, though both teams were often evenly matched in skill, the level of experience in the Hurricanes’ locker room was unparalleled. Rod Brind’Amour, Cory Stillman, Glen Wesley, and Marc Recchi- read those names again. There is an invaluable wealth of post-season wisdom that was served buffet style to the entire Hurricanes roster. And lest readers not look any deeper, don’t forget Bret Hedican and Mike Commodore (who each lost in previous Cup finals) and the gritty, shoulder-battered Doug Weight. The Oilers’ inexperience made them vulnerable.
The composure and focus that was evidently on tap for Carolina helped shutdown the Oilers’ barrage of shots in the third period of Game 7 when Cam Ward wasn’t standing on his head or Edmonton wasn’t busy missing the net.
Bottom line: great series! Edmonton battled back and made it close. Had they converted on any number of the plethora of power-plays they had, this column might have a different tone. Each team bounced back from its losses with determination. It just so happened that Carolina had more bounces (and leading playoff scorer Eric Staal) go its way.
But as ESPN Hockey columnist Terry Frei recently wrote, “It was the NHL’s fourth finals Game 7 in five seasons, and all four have ended with the home team hoisting the Stanley Cup, so this should have been familiar.” The Carolina Hurricanes are no doubt enjoying the familiar.
Canadian teams carrying the West
The last two Stanley Cup Final losing teams have been Canadian- the previous being Calgary in 2003-2004, who went down in seven to Tampa Bay. Aside from the outcomes of both series, the emergence of Canadian NHL teams from the Western Conference (Northwest Division more specifically) can only revitalize hockey in the sport’s native land. With constant speculation about the financial stability of the NHL in Canada- and a source of the hotly debated concept of revenue sharing- having Edmonton and Calgary make it all the way to the final game of the post-season shows that hockey can still work in Canada.
The accomplishments of those teams also help keep players on the team and entice others who may be floating in free-agency limbo. That’s not to ignore the financial implications that come along with making to the Stanley Cup finals. Win or lose, it’s a good thing for Canada- and Alberta especially.
On the flip side
Although Edmonton’s run was nothing short of stellar, if unexpected, it was not enough to keep Chris Pronger from leaving. Equally as unexpected was Pronger’s request to be traded after only one season with the Oilers, its amazing playoff run, and four years left on his $6.25 million per season contract. This revelation came Friday night and seemed to loom over Edmonton’s table in Vancouver at this year’s draft.
Rumored to have requested the trade because of his wife’s discontent with the Alberta capitol, Pronger’s demand becomes problematic for Edmonton for a few reasons.
First, Oilers GM Kevin Lowe now has to shop around, bargain hunting for the best deal on Pronger. Compounding matters further, Lowe also has nine unrestricted free agents to negotiate with this summer. No easy task.
Secondly, replacing a defenseman the caliber of Pronger is tantamount to finding someone to replace your starting goaltender in the third period of the Stanley Cup Finals.
But not all hope is lost with the development. Pronger came off a terrific performance in the playoffs and logged more ice time than most players. What does that mean? It means his stock has sky rocketed. The fact that he’s still under contract, as opposed to a free agent, means Lowe and Oiler coach Craig MacTavish can study all their options and get premium value for Pronger.
Whether it’s spreading around Pronger’s team high salary to add greater depth or to acquire another big name to fill the 6’6”, 220lb. void, the front office of Edmonton appears to have the advantage in this scenario. And looking on the bright side, Jussi Markkanen almost worked out, replacing Pronger just might, too.
(Trading) Block Party
Saturday was a day of big moves- jockeying for potential draft pick positioning- draft day always is. The biggest trade of the day belonged to the host club, Vancouver, which sent a vilified Todd Bertuzzi to the Florida Panthers for number one net minder and 2006 Canadian Olympian, Roberto Luongo. Each team parted ways with a few insignificants when they dealt away their stars.
Luongo is coming off of a sub par season in which he was only five games over .500 (35-30-9), but he did post more than mediocre stats with a 2.97 goals against average and a .914 save percentage- pretty good for someone who played in 74 games and the most famed hockey team at the Olympics.
Bertuzzi, Luongo’s Team Canada teammate, also had a less desirable year with 25 goals and 46 assists in 82 games. The Canucks failed to make the playoffs. And Bertuzzi, fresh from his eighteen month suspension for literally breaking Colorado Avalanche centerman Steve Moore’s neck, Bertuzzi seemed as though the constant demonizing of the assault was constantly haunting him. It may have been due to the press’s inability to question Bertuzzi on any other topics. Still, at $5.2 million, players can’t afford to be scared by ghosts.
Regardless, both teams come out of this deal with positives. Florida gets a big power forward still in his prime that will intensify its offense lead by Olli Jokinen (38 g, 51 a, 89 p). Bertuzzi gets a fresh start in a new franchise that will hopefully allow him to rid his devils and regain the dominant stature he once held when playing next to Marcus Nasland.
Luongo gets a fresh start in the contract department. Panthers GM, Mike Keenan, said the team had failed to reach a deal in negotiations with Luongo, who “wanted the team to make a public statement they would not trade him, [they] would hire Francois Allaire as his goaltender coach, and [they] would sign goaltender Jamie McLennan as his backup,” according to Jim Morris of the Canadian Press. Luongo has commented that he thought both sides were close to an agreement.
Keenan’s explanation was simple: Luongo wanted too much money. “He did ask for significantly more money than what we had offered," said Keenan. "We at that point decided we're now going to make a hockey deal that we feel will make our team better."
The Canucks must take the good with the bad. In finally acquiring a number one goaltender, they now must figure out what to do with Dan Cloutier. His playoff struggles and proneness to injury aside, dealing him elsewhere seems a more viable option for Vancouver now the Luongo is on board.
On a side note, the Colorado Avalanche made news by trading the team’s 2005-2006 second leading scorer to the Calgary Flames. Alex Tanguay had 78 points last year and scored 400 points in 450 games with the Avalanche since first entering the league back in 1999. This is a big pickup for the Flames who may see its offense increase if Tanguay is paired up with sniper Jerome Iginla.
The Flames might now consider focusing on replacing the solid Jordan Leopold who anchored their defense for past three NHL seasons. They also relinquished two second round picks for Tanguay which may have hindered their chances of importing young defensemen in hopes of replacing Leopold. But that may all take a back seat until Calgary actually signs Tanguay, a restricted free agent who made $3.2 million last year.
The wrap up
There were countless events that occurred this year that warrant further elaboration- the outstanding rookie class; Joe Thornton’s breakout year; Carolina rightfully signing Captain Rod Brind’Amour, head coach Peter Laviolette and his staff to five year contract extensions; Buffalo Sabres coach Lindy Ruff’s banter with coaches throughout the playoffs; the recognition of the spectacular achievements at the NHL awards ceremony last Friday evening. The list could go on and on.
Suffice it to say that this year was a great success for the NHL. Despite abysmal TV ratings- something that hockey has suffered for quite sometime- the new style that evolved from the rule changes and their subsequent implementation has turned a once sluggish game of immobile tree choppers to a work of art composed of speed, agility, great offense and equally remarkable defense.
The NHL’s goal must now be to maintain this high quality product and hope that maybe, one day, sports fans in the U.S. will start to care.
Author’s side note:
This year’s draft weekend was interesting from my perspective for two reasons:
1). Alex Tanguay and I worked together in the summer of 1999 as camp counselors for current Atlanta Thrashers coach, then Colorado skipper, Bob Hartley in Hershey, PA (home of the American Hockey League 2005-2006 Calder Cup Champion Hershey Bears). To see his name on the headlines was surreal. All the best to him in Calgary.
2). The Ottawa Senators drafted the son of Mike Foligno, an NHL veteran, former Hershey Bear Coach, and current GM of the Ontario Hockey League’s Sudbury Wolves. Foligno’s son Nick went 28th overall.
The relevance? In his post draft remarks, the young Foligno referenced his “youth” years playing for the Hershey Jr. Bears and the Central Penn Panthers Junior B teams and under coaches Mike Cleveland and former NHLer Tim Tookey- a pair of teams and coaches for whom the author played during his “youth” years.
Seeing those you know make it to the pros relegates writing about to the undeniably bittersweet.
The games were fast paced and kept that way with adherence to the time restraints imposed by the NHL on face-offs and prohibiting line changes by teams that rely on icing the puck as a way out of a tough defensive struggle. Officiating was consistent from the drop of the first puck last October to the final buzzer of Game 7 at RBC Center a week ago Monday.
In its initial planning stages and rule changing discussions, it’s unlikely that the NHL’s owners and front office big wigs had expected the season to be such a success, regardless of their intention. The reality that hockey was- and still is in some markets- the least popular of the unpopular sports, could not have provided a copious supply of optimism at the onset of this past season. Now that it has, the challenge becomes figuring out the appropriate steps to make sure it remains at a high level, ensuring that its first post-lockout year was not a fluke and that skillful displays of hockey excellence are now the norm.
Considering that most fans and analysts conclude that this season was successful beyond expectations, there will be great speculation during the summer about how teams will revamp for next year.
Just over a week removed from the Finals and a few days from the entry draft in the beacon of British Columbia, let’s take a look at some of the interesting goings on in the NHL:
First and foremost: The Stanley Cup Finals
The completion of the first round of the playoffs made for an interesting remainder. In the East, the top four teams in the conference moved onto their respective semi-final match-ups. In the West, it was the bottom four. Out of those eight teams, the rankings indicated that Carolina, then number two in the East, would be a reasonable prediction to reach the Cup Finals.
Conversely, out of the Western Conference’s basement, Edmonton was surely not. But when the teams lined up in Game 1, there was the Oil, refusing to allow their eighth seed to imply immediate defeat at the hands of the second.
And what a series it was. It appeared as though the morning after a 5-4 loss to Carolina and an even bigger loss of goalie Dwayne Roloson to a stomach turning knee injury, everyone in the hockey world had written off Edmonton. However, Edmonton failed to get the memo- although the shellacking Carolina gave them in Game 2 did nothing to smother the naysayers.
But amid the uncertainty and constant scrutiny, the Oilers played with an unrelenting sense of urgency after their Game 2 disaster. They made it a series in which both teams had a chance with no discernible “better” team.
That being said, though both teams were often evenly matched in skill, the level of experience in the Hurricanes’ locker room was unparalleled. Rod Brind’Amour, Cory Stillman, Glen Wesley, and Marc Recchi- read those names again. There is an invaluable wealth of post-season wisdom that was served buffet style to the entire Hurricanes roster. And lest readers not look any deeper, don’t forget Bret Hedican and Mike Commodore (who each lost in previous Cup finals) and the gritty, shoulder-battered Doug Weight. The Oilers’ inexperience made them vulnerable.
The composure and focus that was evidently on tap for Carolina helped shutdown the Oilers’ barrage of shots in the third period of Game 7 when Cam Ward wasn’t standing on his head or Edmonton wasn’t busy missing the net.
Bottom line: great series! Edmonton battled back and made it close. Had they converted on any number of the plethora of power-plays they had, this column might have a different tone. Each team bounced back from its losses with determination. It just so happened that Carolina had more bounces (and leading playoff scorer Eric Staal) go its way.
But as ESPN Hockey columnist Terry Frei recently wrote, “It was the NHL’s fourth finals Game 7 in five seasons, and all four have ended with the home team hoisting the Stanley Cup, so this should have been familiar.” The Carolina Hurricanes are no doubt enjoying the familiar.
Canadian teams carrying the West
The last two Stanley Cup Final losing teams have been Canadian- the previous being Calgary in 2003-2004, who went down in seven to Tampa Bay. Aside from the outcomes of both series, the emergence of Canadian NHL teams from the Western Conference (Northwest Division more specifically) can only revitalize hockey in the sport’s native land. With constant speculation about the financial stability of the NHL in Canada- and a source of the hotly debated concept of revenue sharing- having Edmonton and Calgary make it all the way to the final game of the post-season shows that hockey can still work in Canada.
The accomplishments of those teams also help keep players on the team and entice others who may be floating in free-agency limbo. That’s not to ignore the financial implications that come along with making to the Stanley Cup finals. Win or lose, it’s a good thing for Canada- and Alberta especially.
On the flip side
Although Edmonton’s run was nothing short of stellar, if unexpected, it was not enough to keep Chris Pronger from leaving. Equally as unexpected was Pronger’s request to be traded after only one season with the Oilers, its amazing playoff run, and four years left on his $6.25 million per season contract. This revelation came Friday night and seemed to loom over Edmonton’s table in Vancouver at this year’s draft.
Rumored to have requested the trade because of his wife’s discontent with the Alberta capitol, Pronger’s demand becomes problematic for Edmonton for a few reasons.
First, Oilers GM Kevin Lowe now has to shop around, bargain hunting for the best deal on Pronger. Compounding matters further, Lowe also has nine unrestricted free agents to negotiate with this summer. No easy task.
Secondly, replacing a defenseman the caliber of Pronger is tantamount to finding someone to replace your starting goaltender in the third period of the Stanley Cup Finals.
But not all hope is lost with the development. Pronger came off a terrific performance in the playoffs and logged more ice time than most players. What does that mean? It means his stock has sky rocketed. The fact that he’s still under contract, as opposed to a free agent, means Lowe and Oiler coach Craig MacTavish can study all their options and get premium value for Pronger.
Whether it’s spreading around Pronger’s team high salary to add greater depth or to acquire another big name to fill the 6’6”, 220lb. void, the front office of Edmonton appears to have the advantage in this scenario. And looking on the bright side, Jussi Markkanen almost worked out, replacing Pronger just might, too.
(Trading) Block Party
Saturday was a day of big moves- jockeying for potential draft pick positioning- draft day always is. The biggest trade of the day belonged to the host club, Vancouver, which sent a vilified Todd Bertuzzi to the Florida Panthers for number one net minder and 2006 Canadian Olympian, Roberto Luongo. Each team parted ways with a few insignificants when they dealt away their stars.
Luongo is coming off of a sub par season in which he was only five games over .500 (35-30-9), but he did post more than mediocre stats with a 2.97 goals against average and a .914 save percentage- pretty good for someone who played in 74 games and the most famed hockey team at the Olympics.
Bertuzzi, Luongo’s Team Canada teammate, also had a less desirable year with 25 goals and 46 assists in 82 games. The Canucks failed to make the playoffs. And Bertuzzi, fresh from his eighteen month suspension for literally breaking Colorado Avalanche centerman Steve Moore’s neck, Bertuzzi seemed as though the constant demonizing of the assault was constantly haunting him. It may have been due to the press’s inability to question Bertuzzi on any other topics. Still, at $5.2 million, players can’t afford to be scared by ghosts.
Regardless, both teams come out of this deal with positives. Florida gets a big power forward still in his prime that will intensify its offense lead by Olli Jokinen (38 g, 51 a, 89 p). Bertuzzi gets a fresh start in a new franchise that will hopefully allow him to rid his devils and regain the dominant stature he once held when playing next to Marcus Nasland.
Luongo gets a fresh start in the contract department. Panthers GM, Mike Keenan, said the team had failed to reach a deal in negotiations with Luongo, who “wanted the team to make a public statement they would not trade him, [they] would hire Francois Allaire as his goaltender coach, and [they] would sign goaltender Jamie McLennan as his backup,” according to Jim Morris of the Canadian Press. Luongo has commented that he thought both sides were close to an agreement.
Keenan’s explanation was simple: Luongo wanted too much money. “He did ask for significantly more money than what we had offered," said Keenan. "We at that point decided we're now going to make a hockey deal that we feel will make our team better."
The Canucks must take the good with the bad. In finally acquiring a number one goaltender, they now must figure out what to do with Dan Cloutier. His playoff struggles and proneness to injury aside, dealing him elsewhere seems a more viable option for Vancouver now the Luongo is on board.
On a side note, the Colorado Avalanche made news by trading the team’s 2005-2006 second leading scorer to the Calgary Flames. Alex Tanguay had 78 points last year and scored 400 points in 450 games with the Avalanche since first entering the league back in 1999. This is a big pickup for the Flames who may see its offense increase if Tanguay is paired up with sniper Jerome Iginla.
The Flames might now consider focusing on replacing the solid Jordan Leopold who anchored their defense for past three NHL seasons. They also relinquished two second round picks for Tanguay which may have hindered their chances of importing young defensemen in hopes of replacing Leopold. But that may all take a back seat until Calgary actually signs Tanguay, a restricted free agent who made $3.2 million last year.
The wrap up
There were countless events that occurred this year that warrant further elaboration- the outstanding rookie class; Joe Thornton’s breakout year; Carolina rightfully signing Captain Rod Brind’Amour, head coach Peter Laviolette and his staff to five year contract extensions; Buffalo Sabres coach Lindy Ruff’s banter with coaches throughout the playoffs; the recognition of the spectacular achievements at the NHL awards ceremony last Friday evening. The list could go on and on.
Suffice it to say that this year was a great success for the NHL. Despite abysmal TV ratings- something that hockey has suffered for quite sometime- the new style that evolved from the rule changes and their subsequent implementation has turned a once sluggish game of immobile tree choppers to a work of art composed of speed, agility, great offense and equally remarkable defense.
The NHL’s goal must now be to maintain this high quality product and hope that maybe, one day, sports fans in the U.S. will start to care.
Author’s side note:
This year’s draft weekend was interesting from my perspective for two reasons:
1). Alex Tanguay and I worked together in the summer of 1999 as camp counselors for current Atlanta Thrashers coach, then Colorado skipper, Bob Hartley in Hershey, PA (home of the American Hockey League 2005-2006 Calder Cup Champion Hershey Bears). To see his name on the headlines was surreal. All the best to him in Calgary.
2). The Ottawa Senators drafted the son of Mike Foligno, an NHL veteran, former Hershey Bear Coach, and current GM of the Ontario Hockey League’s Sudbury Wolves. Foligno’s son Nick went 28th overall.
The relevance? In his post draft remarks, the young Foligno referenced his “youth” years playing for the Hershey Jr. Bears and the Central Penn Panthers Junior B teams and under coaches Mike Cleveland and former NHLer Tim Tookey- a pair of teams and coaches for whom the author played during his “youth” years.
Seeing those you know make it to the pros relegates writing about to the undeniably bittersweet.
Friday, June 16, 2006
Jonathan Franzen's "The Corrections"
Books are fun. Sometimes they take longer to finish than intended, but usually the end result sits somewhere among being impressed that the book even had its spine cracked, pure enjoyment of the content, or the enhancement of one’s literary bravado upon completion of, say, some 600-page behemoth. The point is that reading a book to its very end awards readers a sense of accomplishment that transcends said reader’s view of the plot (fiction) or its topic (non-fiction). You don't have to like it to be impressed that you finished it.
Recently, I read Jonathan Franzen’s 566-page paper weight entitled The Corrections (Farrar, Straus and Giroux- 2001). The book revolves around one family, the Lamberts, and its five eclectic members- the father, mother, eldest son, middle son, and youngest daughter. Beginning from the present day, it walks the reader through the family’s origins in the Midwest (where Franzen is from) to the children’s current residences on the East coast (where Franzen is now) using varying retrospective techniques to dissect their moral layering- ex: the narrator elucidates Denise’s (daughter) failed relationships and sexual escapades from her adult life by stepping back and recounting an incident that helped shape her character fifteen years earlier. Franzen’s use of an omniscient narrator is highly effective, like a master lapidary customizing Nigerian diamonds.
The story flows unfettered, the setting changes are dynamic and random- keeping the reader focused- and the characters are detestable and lovable and easily resemble any number of relatives in your family or mine. And the details are intricate and intelligent (Franzen obviously did his research in order to lend legitimacy to the many scenarios he describes- working for the railroad, patent payoffs, etc.). The plot line possesses a fecundity that I have not come across in some time, aside from its occasional esoteric language (the jargon can be disengaging).
The novel’s pitfall, unfortunately, can be found in its hurried conclusion. After investing such copious time reading and investigating the numerous characters and those who reappear and disappear with a turn of a page, the brevity of the offered ending teeters on the almost-insulting. Franzen spends the last segment (chapter?) breaking down each of the main five family members’ ending locale- the children strewn about the country and the parent’s living in a situation that seems like a non-option at the beginning of the book. However, the prefaced exposition would seem to be indicative of a riveting ending- a conclusion that should torment your pathos or soften your perception of the family, anything to compliment the theme. It does not serve the readers as well as the rest of the plot; fifteen approximate pages to end more than 500 hardly suffices. It’s as though you’re aroused and seduced by the plot’s body, only to realize that once the ending reaches climax it shoots blanks.
Regardless, it is a fascinating story that succeeds in depicting the dysfunctionality and pretension of a family that constantly tries to maintain a functional appearance in the eyes of its neighbors. Meanwhile, it’s so focused on hiding its demons that it’s unable to realize that each of the families in the houses next door are just as abhorrent. Really, Franzen succeeds at emphasizing the notion that the “idea” of a normal family is contradictory to reality, and that the only way in which a normal family can be defined is by its abnormalities.
For more about Franzen and his other work (he has multiple novels, a collection of non-fiction essays, and writes for the New Yorker and Harper's Bazaar, among others), check out his web site. Also, for more thought provocation, follow the link to the reader's guide questions for the novel.
Recently, I read Jonathan Franzen’s 566-page paper weight entitled The Corrections (Farrar, Straus and Giroux- 2001). The book revolves around one family, the Lamberts, and its five eclectic members- the father, mother, eldest son, middle son, and youngest daughter. Beginning from the present day, it walks the reader through the family’s origins in the Midwest (where Franzen is from) to the children’s current residences on the East coast (where Franzen is now) using varying retrospective techniques to dissect their moral layering- ex: the narrator elucidates Denise’s (daughter) failed relationships and sexual escapades from her adult life by stepping back and recounting an incident that helped shape her character fifteen years earlier. Franzen’s use of an omniscient narrator is highly effective, like a master lapidary customizing Nigerian diamonds.
The story flows unfettered, the setting changes are dynamic and random- keeping the reader focused- and the characters are detestable and lovable and easily resemble any number of relatives in your family or mine. And the details are intricate and intelligent (Franzen obviously did his research in order to lend legitimacy to the many scenarios he describes- working for the railroad, patent payoffs, etc.). The plot line possesses a fecundity that I have not come across in some time, aside from its occasional esoteric language (the jargon can be disengaging).
The novel’s pitfall, unfortunately, can be found in its hurried conclusion. After investing such copious time reading and investigating the numerous characters and those who reappear and disappear with a turn of a page, the brevity of the offered ending teeters on the almost-insulting. Franzen spends the last segment (chapter?) breaking down each of the main five family members’ ending locale- the children strewn about the country and the parent’s living in a situation that seems like a non-option at the beginning of the book. However, the prefaced exposition would seem to be indicative of a riveting ending- a conclusion that should torment your pathos or soften your perception of the family, anything to compliment the theme. It does not serve the readers as well as the rest of the plot; fifteen approximate pages to end more than 500 hardly suffices. It’s as though you’re aroused and seduced by the plot’s body, only to realize that once the ending reaches climax it shoots blanks.
Regardless, it is a fascinating story that succeeds in depicting the dysfunctionality and pretension of a family that constantly tries to maintain a functional appearance in the eyes of its neighbors. Meanwhile, it’s so focused on hiding its demons that it’s unable to realize that each of the families in the houses next door are just as abhorrent. Really, Franzen succeeds at emphasizing the notion that the “idea” of a normal family is contradictory to reality, and that the only way in which a normal family can be defined is by its abnormalities.
For more about Franzen and his other work (he has multiple novels, a collection of non-fiction essays, and writes for the New Yorker and Harper's Bazaar, among others), check out his web site. Also, for more thought provocation, follow the link to the reader's guide questions for the novel.
Friday, May 5, 2006
JOB: Looking for a Flyers GM who knows how to bring in the right guys
Thank you, Scott Burnside. Finally, someone is vocalizing the fact that Philadelphia Flyers GM/President, Bob Clarke, made mistakes in his preseason acquisitions heading into the 2005-2006 NHL season. That is precisely what he did. What makes these pickups so egregious is that Clarke added them to a team that he knew had to recalibrate itself in order to compete in the faster paced NHL. Derian Hatcher and Mike Rathje. Those are two major, long-term contracts Clarke negotiated, expending precious room in a new age of a salary cap, to help the Flyers win a Stanley Cup.
Really, those two outdated defensemen? Rathje and Hatcher play exactly the style of hockey that the new rules in the NHL intended to eradicate- slow, immobile, tree-chopping hackers who beat the piss out of players that camp out in front of the net on power-plays or who whiz past them at full speed on their way to a 7-1, Game 6 rout. Clarke knew the freshly opened ice was going to be an obstacle for these two defensemen and signed them anyway. One can only assume that Clarke thought these weathered veterans could change their styles of play accordingly, as if it were easy to do so after already spending a decade in the league in which their mannerisms were the norm.
The Flyers’ first-round playoff collapse should have been all but inevitable, especially considering the Buffalo Sabres’ 110 points was the third best in the Eastern Conference and certainly some of the fastest. The Flyers couldn’t keep up, literally. That’s Clarke’s fault; he’s charged with the responsibility of making sure they can. The only saving grace of Hatcher and Ratjhe’s three and four-year contracts is that Philly has a steady cash flow, giving them the opportunity to spend more once the cap rises*. Here’s to quality moves for fewer tortoises and more hares.
Clarke is renowned for making questionable transactions in the name of building a Cup-worthy Flyers organization. Here a few (in no particular order): Vaclav "Vinny" Prospal and Ruslan Fedetenko- Both of them were dealt to the Tampa Bay Lightning. They both won a championship in 2004. Advantage: those guys.
Jimmy Vandermeer and Dennis Seidenberg- Vandermeer went to the Chicago Blackhawks and Seidenberg to the Pheonix Coyotes. These are two defensemen made for the new NHL. They can skate, they can pass, they can shoot (Seidenberg once registered the hardest shot in Flyers training camp when he was roughly 13 years-old**), and they can play tough.
Rob Brind’Amour- He went to the 2002 Cup Finals with the Carolina Hurricanes, who lost in five games to the Detroit Red Wings, and is the captain of this year’s Hurricane roster that finished second in the Eastern Conference and is about to collide with New Jersey Devils in Round 2 of the playoffs.
Danny Markov- In another of Clarke’s notorious deadline deals in which he picks up a few players whose contracts are scheduled to expire at the end of the season in order to make a final run into the playoffs, he added Markov- a mobile, quick and shifty defensemen who had great passing and positioning abilities. He left after one partial season. His down side, he spent a significant portion of this year on the Nashville Predators’ injured list.
Alexei Zhamnov- Zhamnov was acquired the same year as Markov (2003-2004) and was a great passing center who saw the ice and could easily play an off-wing on the power play as well as center the team’s second line. Zhamnov landed in Boston where he’ll undoubtedly look back with regret on the recently ended regular season.
Tony Amonte- Clarke picked him up for two seasons, maybe in hopes of agitating the chemistry once held between Amonte and Jeremy Roenick during their days in Chicago and with Team USA. Much like Markov and Zhamnov, the new NHL rules are tailored for Amonte’s method of play and allow him to test the elasticity of his twilight. He was an integral component of Philadelphia’s team that lost to the Lightening (see: Prospal and Fedetenko) in Game 7 of the 2003-2004 Eastern Conference Finals.
Jeremy Roenick- J.R. was a solid focal point for the Fly-guys during his tenure in Philly. He was good for consistent point production and leadership and sparking the team’s momentum with big, albeit often controversial, hits. He could have flourished with the Flyers if the new rules had been implemented sooner and he not been as prone to injury as drug addicts are to theft. “Styles” (Roenick's infamous nickname/vanity plate for his Benz while in Philly) is where he belongs though, now living the life as a flamboyant Los Angeles King.
Pavel Brendl- This guy was awful from the start, regardless of being heralded as the next big thing in the NHL. His stats speak for themselves. Since making his league debut in 2001-2002, he’s put up numbers of 78 games played, with 11 goals and 11 assists for 22 points, and 16 penalty minutes. Search the AHL for some of the lost productivity that Brendl promised as a top prospect (one who refused, at the onset, to start his professional career in the minors). Brendl is the kind of player who costs scouts their jobs.
Goaltenders- Only when discussing pro sports in Philadelphia can the names Garth Snow, Roman Cechmanek, Maxim Ouellette, Brian Boucher, Sean Burke, and Robert Esche appear in the same sentence. All who have passed through the hallways of the CoreStates Spectrum, First Union Center, Wachovia Center and the myriad of other corporate takeovers that have affected the name of Philadelphia's pro rink.
Lest we be too negative, Clarke does deserve a small fragment of credit. He did rid of the concussion that was Eric Lindros, who has gone on to achieve almost nothing aside from a gold medal in the 2002 Olympics, for the reliable, speedy Kim Johnsson from the New York Rangers. Although this year was tough for the defensemen, who’s battling post-concussion syndrome, for the last few seasons Johnsson has been a steady hand on the blue line and a leader in the points column for Philly, playing in every game situation. The Flyers sorely missed him this playoffs.
And with the king of all moves, Clarke did acquire the best hockey player in the entire world in the form of Peter Forsberg. Forsberg missed twenty-or-so games due to injuries and may have to have both ankles operated on this off-season (injuries and surgeries have plagued Forsberg since he was originally drafted by the Flyers and immediately traded to the Quebec Nordiques- now the Colorado Avelanche- for Lindros in 1991), and still managed to be the key factor in Simon Gagne and Mike Knuble having career years statistically.
Ultimately, Clarke’s inability to put together a squad that has meshed nicely enough to win a Cup speaks to his poor team-building skills louder than anything in his dreary managerial history. He signs the high profile guys seemingly without considering what type of atmosphere it will create in the locker room. Clarke is a continued source of frustration for Philadelphia fans whose only reason for not targeting their malcontented disposition towards him is that he resides comfortably near the press box, looming high above rink side, looking over as the fans boo his team, which might, in a sense, be directed towards him.
* : So many bad moves in one GM’s history would almost guarantee termination with any other organization. But for Clarke, that is practically impossible due to the fact that he’s one of the most prominent executives of the team, purportedly holding more stock than almost of anybody other than Comcast Spectacor Chairman, Ed Snider.
** : not really, more like 21.
Really, those two outdated defensemen? Rathje and Hatcher play exactly the style of hockey that the new rules in the NHL intended to eradicate- slow, immobile, tree-chopping hackers who beat the piss out of players that camp out in front of the net on power-plays or who whiz past them at full speed on their way to a 7-1, Game 6 rout. Clarke knew the freshly opened ice was going to be an obstacle for these two defensemen and signed them anyway. One can only assume that Clarke thought these weathered veterans could change their styles of play accordingly, as if it were easy to do so after already spending a decade in the league in which their mannerisms were the norm.
The Flyers’ first-round playoff collapse should have been all but inevitable, especially considering the Buffalo Sabres’ 110 points was the third best in the Eastern Conference and certainly some of the fastest. The Flyers couldn’t keep up, literally. That’s Clarke’s fault; he’s charged with the responsibility of making sure they can. The only saving grace of Hatcher and Ratjhe’s three and four-year contracts is that Philly has a steady cash flow, giving them the opportunity to spend more once the cap rises*. Here’s to quality moves for fewer tortoises and more hares.
Clarke is renowned for making questionable transactions in the name of building a Cup-worthy Flyers organization. Here a few (in no particular order): Vaclav "Vinny" Prospal and Ruslan Fedetenko- Both of them were dealt to the Tampa Bay Lightning. They both won a championship in 2004. Advantage: those guys.
Jimmy Vandermeer and Dennis Seidenberg- Vandermeer went to the Chicago Blackhawks and Seidenberg to the Pheonix Coyotes. These are two defensemen made for the new NHL. They can skate, they can pass, they can shoot (Seidenberg once registered the hardest shot in Flyers training camp when he was roughly 13 years-old**), and they can play tough.
Rob Brind’Amour- He went to the 2002 Cup Finals with the Carolina Hurricanes, who lost in five games to the Detroit Red Wings, and is the captain of this year’s Hurricane roster that finished second in the Eastern Conference and is about to collide with New Jersey Devils in Round 2 of the playoffs.
Danny Markov- In another of Clarke’s notorious deadline deals in which he picks up a few players whose contracts are scheduled to expire at the end of the season in order to make a final run into the playoffs, he added Markov- a mobile, quick and shifty defensemen who had great passing and positioning abilities. He left after one partial season. His down side, he spent a significant portion of this year on the Nashville Predators’ injured list.
Alexei Zhamnov- Zhamnov was acquired the same year as Markov (2003-2004) and was a great passing center who saw the ice and could easily play an off-wing on the power play as well as center the team’s second line. Zhamnov landed in Boston where he’ll undoubtedly look back with regret on the recently ended regular season.
Tony Amonte- Clarke picked him up for two seasons, maybe in hopes of agitating the chemistry once held between Amonte and Jeremy Roenick during their days in Chicago and with Team USA. Much like Markov and Zhamnov, the new NHL rules are tailored for Amonte’s method of play and allow him to test the elasticity of his twilight. He was an integral component of Philadelphia’s team that lost to the Lightening (see: Prospal and Fedetenko) in Game 7 of the 2003-2004 Eastern Conference Finals.
Jeremy Roenick- J.R. was a solid focal point for the Fly-guys during his tenure in Philly. He was good for consistent point production and leadership and sparking the team’s momentum with big, albeit often controversial, hits. He could have flourished with the Flyers if the new rules had been implemented sooner and he not been as prone to injury as drug addicts are to theft. “Styles” (Roenick's infamous nickname/vanity plate for his Benz while in Philly) is where he belongs though, now living the life as a flamboyant Los Angeles King.
Pavel Brendl- This guy was awful from the start, regardless of being heralded as the next big thing in the NHL. His stats speak for themselves. Since making his league debut in 2001-2002, he’s put up numbers of 78 games played, with 11 goals and 11 assists for 22 points, and 16 penalty minutes. Search the AHL for some of the lost productivity that Brendl promised as a top prospect (one who refused, at the onset, to start his professional career in the minors). Brendl is the kind of player who costs scouts their jobs.
Goaltenders- Only when discussing pro sports in Philadelphia can the names Garth Snow, Roman Cechmanek, Maxim Ouellette, Brian Boucher, Sean Burke, and Robert Esche appear in the same sentence. All who have passed through the hallways of the CoreStates Spectrum, First Union Center, Wachovia Center and the myriad of other corporate takeovers that have affected the name of Philadelphia's pro rink.
Lest we be too negative, Clarke does deserve a small fragment of credit. He did rid of the concussion that was Eric Lindros, who has gone on to achieve almost nothing aside from a gold medal in the 2002 Olympics, for the reliable, speedy Kim Johnsson from the New York Rangers. Although this year was tough for the defensemen, who’s battling post-concussion syndrome, for the last few seasons Johnsson has been a steady hand on the blue line and a leader in the points column for Philly, playing in every game situation. The Flyers sorely missed him this playoffs.
And with the king of all moves, Clarke did acquire the best hockey player in the entire world in the form of Peter Forsberg. Forsberg missed twenty-or-so games due to injuries and may have to have both ankles operated on this off-season (injuries and surgeries have plagued Forsberg since he was originally drafted by the Flyers and immediately traded to the Quebec Nordiques- now the Colorado Avelanche- for Lindros in 1991), and still managed to be the key factor in Simon Gagne and Mike Knuble having career years statistically.
Ultimately, Clarke’s inability to put together a squad that has meshed nicely enough to win a Cup speaks to his poor team-building skills louder than anything in his dreary managerial history. He signs the high profile guys seemingly without considering what type of atmosphere it will create in the locker room. Clarke is a continued source of frustration for Philadelphia fans whose only reason for not targeting their malcontented disposition towards him is that he resides comfortably near the press box, looming high above rink side, looking over as the fans boo his team, which might, in a sense, be directed towards him.
* : So many bad moves in one GM’s history would almost guarantee termination with any other organization. But for Clarke, that is practically impossible due to the fact that he’s one of the most prominent executives of the team, purportedly holding more stock than almost of anybody other than Comcast Spectacor Chairman, Ed Snider.
** : not really, more like 21.
Tuesday, April 25, 2006
The NHL's Real Rookie of the Year
THE NHL's REAL ROOKIE OF THE YEAR
The 2005-2006 Calder Trophy is a veritable certainty, but in a league that has lost $10 billion over a decade, expanded grotesquely, and lost an entire season and the solidity of its fan base, stats shouldn't be the only determining factor in this year's rookie race.
This year’s NHL Rookie of the Year Award contest only has two nominees that matter, regardless of having one of the best groups of rookies in years- Dion Phaneuf in Calgary, Henrik Lundqvist in New York, Mike Richards and Jeff Carter in Philly, to name a few. But the only two that count are the Pittsburgh Penguins’ Sidney Crosby and the Washington Capitals’ Alexander Ovechkin (OV). OV was tops in rookie scoring and third league-wide, Crosby finished second and sixth. These two players are the most exciting and captivating to land in the NHL since Teemu Selanne and Pavel Bure. Ovechkin’s flamboyant goal scoring most resembles the likes of Ilya Kovalchuk when he entered the league five years ago. Still, pertaining to the best package deal for the league and a team, the Calder Trophy may best be served if awarded to Crosby.
When taking into account the comparison between the two players, one factor jumps out at first. Crosby had a worse team to play with (as evidenced by the standings) and lost his roommate and line-mate, Mark Recchi, to the Carolina Hurricanes at the trade deadline. Ovechkin rode shotgun with Dainius Zubrus by his side all year long, a well seasoned and very skilled veteran, making it easier to learn how the other plays, thus, complimenting one another. Crosby had a more inconsistent lineup to play with and still had more assists than OV while lacking a specific line or teammate to form an one-ice chemistry with, which is a huge contributor to a player’s success. All of this attributed to Washington winning 29 games this season, seven more than Pittsburgh and good enough to store both squads in the basement among the league's four lousiest teams.
Looking at the total point figures, OV maintained a pretty healthy lead over Crosby for most of the year, although early on they were neck-and-neck. Still, OV finished with 106 pts, a mere four ahead of Crosby- a remarkable accomplishment by both rookies. However, a look deeper into the stats will tell you about Crosby’s characteristics as an unselfish playmaker. OV had 52 goals on 425 shots. Conversely, Crosby only had 39 goals on 277 shots. OV took 148 more shots than Crosby and only scored 13 more goals. What does this show? It shows that Crosby can carry his weight in goals but sees the ice well enough to dish the puck at the right time as opposed to feeling that he needs to take over five shots per game to produce.
An easy counter-argument to this would be that OV had a less than stellar supporting roster also and a greater amount of offensive pressure put on his shoulders. This would not be false. When crunching the numbers, OV scored a goal on average of once every eight shots. But Crosby averaged one every seven. Furthermore, when considering the shot differential between the two rookies and their numbers of goals, had Crosby taken as many shots as OV, he would have been on pace to score 21 more goals, catapulting him past OV’s 52.
In regards to assists, Crosby had 63, nine better than OV. Hockey players and analysts have long paid tribute to the assist column as the vital component to the goal column- almost every goal would not have happened had an assist not preceded it. The assist has always been a primary benchmark for determining true team players. That’s not to imply that OV is not a team player- his three shorthanded goals and 54 assists indicate quite the opposite. But taking into account the awful team in Pittsburgh, the disparity between goals vs. shots, and his significant surplus of assists, it seems that Crosby provides better at all around production. At the very least, his vision is certainly beyond his years.
One area where the two appear to run parallel is in their physical game. OV and Crosby do not fear contact; they just approach it in different ways. OV, at 6’2”, 216 lbs, has about three inches and twenty pounds on Crosby. OV has almost as many highlight open ice hits as he does highlight reel goals. Crosby, on the other hand, is a grinder who works hard in the corners and along the boards and has fought when he’s had to. Crosby simply lacks the size to throw the big hits like OV. Early in the season, fans caught a glimpse of his toughness when Derian Hatcher bloodied Crosby’s mouth and chipped two teeth with multiple high sticks, only to watch him beat the Flyers on an overtime breakaway. Toughness is an absolute necessity in hockey, especially the NHL, and these two youngsters can bring it…no question.
Ultimately, OV is almost guaranteed to win this year’s Calder Trophy- he’s fast, he’s flashy, and he’s the first rookie since 1992-1993 to score fifty or more goals (Selanne set the record that year with 76). And all the talking heads in the hockey world are on his side. But when it comes to deciding who had a greater impact on his team, Crosby clearly edges out OV. Crosby played in the same amount of games, and although scored fewer goals, he took far fewer shots than OV, which seems to display his propensity for better shot selection (further solidified by reiterating that had he taken one less shot than OV he may have reached 60 goals). Crosby’s assist stats illustrate his ability see the game as it develops, his selflessness with the puck, and his faith in his teammates (who sucked). And just like OV, he was called upon to play in every scenario- even strength, power play and penalty kill (except for the 110 minutes he spent in the box), holding a lead or climbing back from one. He accomplished this as an 18 year-old kid straight out of the Quebec junior league and no professional experience- something the 20 year-old Ovechkin had plenty of the last two seasons in Russia. The history books won’t forget Crosby either; he’ll be held in perpetuity as the youngest NHLer to ever hit the 100 point plateau. But off the ice, Crosby revitalized a town whose fans' waning interest had exacerbated its hockey team’s floundering success. OV came to a city that didn’t care about hockey and wasn’t able to change that. Only hockey fans cared about OV, but Vanity Fair readers learned to love Sid the Kid.
The argument for Crosby as rookie of the year is not one based on who’s the better player- OV and Crosby play different styles of hockey that are equally as effective (they can both change the tempo of a game in a single shift). It’s centered on the entire package that Crosby brought to the 2005-2006 table- the skill, the stats, the personality, the excitement, and the new arena the Penguins might now receive. He was able to achieve all of this while arguably having more pressure placed on him than any other rookie before; his draft day 2005 jersey read “Crosby,” that must be Canadian for “Franchise.” Statistics don’t always speak to a player’s real value. If the NHL is looking to boost its ubiquity in markets outside Canada and more towards major U.S. cities, they should be celebrating Crosby’s off-ice contributions as well as his outstanding on-ice performance when determining who had the better year.
The 2005-2006 Calder Trophy is a veritable certainty, but in a league that has lost $10 billion over a decade, expanded grotesquely, and lost an entire season and the solidity of its fan base, stats shouldn't be the only determining factor in this year's rookie race.
This year’s NHL Rookie of the Year Award contest only has two nominees that matter, regardless of having one of the best groups of rookies in years- Dion Phaneuf in Calgary, Henrik Lundqvist in New York, Mike Richards and Jeff Carter in Philly, to name a few. But the only two that count are the Pittsburgh Penguins’ Sidney Crosby and the Washington Capitals’ Alexander Ovechkin (OV). OV was tops in rookie scoring and third league-wide, Crosby finished second and sixth. These two players are the most exciting and captivating to land in the NHL since Teemu Selanne and Pavel Bure. Ovechkin’s flamboyant goal scoring most resembles the likes of Ilya Kovalchuk when he entered the league five years ago. Still, pertaining to the best package deal for the league and a team, the Calder Trophy may best be served if awarded to Crosby.
When taking into account the comparison between the two players, one factor jumps out at first. Crosby had a worse team to play with (as evidenced by the standings) and lost his roommate and line-mate, Mark Recchi, to the Carolina Hurricanes at the trade deadline. Ovechkin rode shotgun with Dainius Zubrus by his side all year long, a well seasoned and very skilled veteran, making it easier to learn how the other plays, thus, complimenting one another. Crosby had a more inconsistent lineup to play with and still had more assists than OV while lacking a specific line or teammate to form an one-ice chemistry with, which is a huge contributor to a player’s success. All of this attributed to Washington winning 29 games this season, seven more than Pittsburgh and good enough to store both squads in the basement among the league's four lousiest teams.
Looking at the total point figures, OV maintained a pretty healthy lead over Crosby for most of the year, although early on they were neck-and-neck. Still, OV finished with 106 pts, a mere four ahead of Crosby- a remarkable accomplishment by both rookies. However, a look deeper into the stats will tell you about Crosby’s characteristics as an unselfish playmaker. OV had 52 goals on 425 shots. Conversely, Crosby only had 39 goals on 277 shots. OV took 148 more shots than Crosby and only scored 13 more goals. What does this show? It shows that Crosby can carry his weight in goals but sees the ice well enough to dish the puck at the right time as opposed to feeling that he needs to take over five shots per game to produce.
An easy counter-argument to this would be that OV had a less than stellar supporting roster also and a greater amount of offensive pressure put on his shoulders. This would not be false. When crunching the numbers, OV scored a goal on average of once every eight shots. But Crosby averaged one every seven. Furthermore, when considering the shot differential between the two rookies and their numbers of goals, had Crosby taken as many shots as OV, he would have been on pace to score 21 more goals, catapulting him past OV’s 52.
In regards to assists, Crosby had 63, nine better than OV. Hockey players and analysts have long paid tribute to the assist column as the vital component to the goal column- almost every goal would not have happened had an assist not preceded it. The assist has always been a primary benchmark for determining true team players. That’s not to imply that OV is not a team player- his three shorthanded goals and 54 assists indicate quite the opposite. But taking into account the awful team in Pittsburgh, the disparity between goals vs. shots, and his significant surplus of assists, it seems that Crosby provides better at all around production. At the very least, his vision is certainly beyond his years.
One area where the two appear to run parallel is in their physical game. OV and Crosby do not fear contact; they just approach it in different ways. OV, at 6’2”, 216 lbs, has about three inches and twenty pounds on Crosby. OV has almost as many highlight open ice hits as he does highlight reel goals. Crosby, on the other hand, is a grinder who works hard in the corners and along the boards and has fought when he’s had to. Crosby simply lacks the size to throw the big hits like OV. Early in the season, fans caught a glimpse of his toughness when Derian Hatcher bloodied Crosby’s mouth and chipped two teeth with multiple high sticks, only to watch him beat the Flyers on an overtime breakaway. Toughness is an absolute necessity in hockey, especially the NHL, and these two youngsters can bring it…no question.
Ultimately, OV is almost guaranteed to win this year’s Calder Trophy- he’s fast, he’s flashy, and he’s the first rookie since 1992-1993 to score fifty or more goals (Selanne set the record that year with 76). And all the talking heads in the hockey world are on his side. But when it comes to deciding who had a greater impact on his team, Crosby clearly edges out OV. Crosby played in the same amount of games, and although scored fewer goals, he took far fewer shots than OV, which seems to display his propensity for better shot selection (further solidified by reiterating that had he taken one less shot than OV he may have reached 60 goals). Crosby’s assist stats illustrate his ability see the game as it develops, his selflessness with the puck, and his faith in his teammates (who sucked). And just like OV, he was called upon to play in every scenario- even strength, power play and penalty kill (except for the 110 minutes he spent in the box), holding a lead or climbing back from one. He accomplished this as an 18 year-old kid straight out of the Quebec junior league and no professional experience- something the 20 year-old Ovechkin had plenty of the last two seasons in Russia. The history books won’t forget Crosby either; he’ll be held in perpetuity as the youngest NHLer to ever hit the 100 point plateau. But off the ice, Crosby revitalized a town whose fans' waning interest had exacerbated its hockey team’s floundering success. OV came to a city that didn’t care about hockey and wasn’t able to change that. Only hockey fans cared about OV, but Vanity Fair readers learned to love Sid the Kid.
The argument for Crosby as rookie of the year is not one based on who’s the better player- OV and Crosby play different styles of hockey that are equally as effective (they can both change the tempo of a game in a single shift). It’s centered on the entire package that Crosby brought to the 2005-2006 table- the skill, the stats, the personality, the excitement, and the new arena the Penguins might now receive. He was able to achieve all of this while arguably having more pressure placed on him than any other rookie before; his draft day 2005 jersey read “Crosby,” that must be Canadian for “Franchise.” Statistics don’t always speak to a player’s real value. If the NHL is looking to boost its ubiquity in markets outside Canada and more towards major U.S. cities, they should be celebrating Crosby’s off-ice contributions as well as his outstanding on-ice performance when determining who had the better year.
Monday, April 17, 2006
A Few Thoughts On...
Illogical statements:
Regardless of your feelings on the war in Iraq, its constant review is necessary to make sure that the military’s tactics evolve accordingly in order to successfully combat the ever changing insurgency- one that is keenly aware that its survival and affect on American troops is dependant on constant reinvention. With that being said, many politicians/bureaucrats in the Bush administration have vocalized their view that it is inappropriate to criticize the Pentagon, the Defense Secretary, and the President during a time of war. Pardon me, but that seems to be quite an egregious assertion. So, really, what they are saying is that people (read: retired generals, military and DOD staff who’ve actually witnessed the war first hand) should not criticize how the war is being managed during the war- when lives are at stake, fresh approaches to cultivating a broken nation are vital, and when making the necessary changes is essential to ensuring that Iraq is reconstructed, politically and physically, well enough to return it to the functioning international community. Here is what some defenders of Secretary Rumsfeld had to say the other day about a Wall Street Journal article in which four retired generals dropped the hammer on Rumsfeld: "We do not believe that it is appropriate for active duty, or retired, senior military officers to publicly criticize U.S. civilian leadership during war" (CNN.com). Oh, you don’t? Well, that makes sense. The quote is actually rather contradictory- military officers shouldn't criticize civilian leadership? Ok. Nothing says "we take responsibility and accountability" like claiming that criticizing those in charge is inappropriate. And this is coming from the party that opposes big government intervention. Maybe they believe they are above critique.
What is really being said seems to be “don’t bitch and moan until after military operations have ceased…and it's too late to fix our mistakes.” Can anyone explain this? When a football team is struggling to win, you don't hear its fans saying, "don't criticize the coach while the season is still in progress." You see quite the opposite, actually. There are blatant demands for his immediate removal, for a change to be made so that hopefully the team can muster some success in what’s left of that season. That's only football; this is real life with real consequences (i.e.: death, chaos, civil war). It is absurd to think that the citizenry should be reprimanded for criticizing its elected officials' mishandling of what has turned into a very unpopular, under-supported war, especially when those citizens are former military higher-ups who've got more credibility than any suit in Washington. It's not about how people think the war should be handled (not this time, anyway). It's about the nuaseating selfrightesouness of those who feel that criticizing those who made the decision to start it is unecessary. Hopefully democracy will show these fools to the door. Unreal.
Regardless of your feelings on the war in Iraq, its constant review is necessary to make sure that the military’s tactics evolve accordingly in order to successfully combat the ever changing insurgency- one that is keenly aware that its survival and affect on American troops is dependant on constant reinvention. With that being said, many politicians/bureaucrats in the Bush administration have vocalized their view that it is inappropriate to criticize the Pentagon, the Defense Secretary, and the President during a time of war. Pardon me, but that seems to be quite an egregious assertion. So, really, what they are saying is that people (read: retired generals, military and DOD staff who’ve actually witnessed the war first hand) should not criticize how the war is being managed during the war- when lives are at stake, fresh approaches to cultivating a broken nation are vital, and when making the necessary changes is essential to ensuring that Iraq is reconstructed, politically and physically, well enough to return it to the functioning international community. Here is what some defenders of Secretary Rumsfeld had to say the other day about a Wall Street Journal article in which four retired generals dropped the hammer on Rumsfeld: "We do not believe that it is appropriate for active duty, or retired, senior military officers to publicly criticize U.S. civilian leadership during war" (CNN.com). Oh, you don’t? Well, that makes sense. The quote is actually rather contradictory- military officers shouldn't criticize civilian leadership? Ok. Nothing says "we take responsibility and accountability" like claiming that criticizing those in charge is inappropriate. And this is coming from the party that opposes big government intervention. Maybe they believe they are above critique.
What is really being said seems to be “don’t bitch and moan until after military operations have ceased…and it's too late to fix our mistakes.” Can anyone explain this? When a football team is struggling to win, you don't hear its fans saying, "don't criticize the coach while the season is still in progress." You see quite the opposite, actually. There are blatant demands for his immediate removal, for a change to be made so that hopefully the team can muster some success in what’s left of that season. That's only football; this is real life with real consequences (i.e.: death, chaos, civil war). It is absurd to think that the citizenry should be reprimanded for criticizing its elected officials' mishandling of what has turned into a very unpopular, under-supported war, especially when those citizens are former military higher-ups who've got more credibility than any suit in Washington. It's not about how people think the war should be handled (not this time, anyway). It's about the nuaseating selfrightesouness of those who feel that criticizing those who made the decision to start it is unecessary. Hopefully democracy will show these fools to the door. Unreal.
Friday, March 10, 2006
A Few Thoughts On...
The NHL trade deadline:
25 trades, 40 players, and the busiest six hours to ever end the NHL trade deadline. Yesterday, between 9am and 3pm- the official deadline- saw more deals than any previous final trading day. A few of the notable transactions from March 9th, 2006:
Some of the wisest moves were made by the Washington Capitals, who continued to take steps to create a foundation of youth and build the team around rookie-phenom Alexander Ovechkin by ridding of two veterans in exchange for two 2006 draft picks. The Caps sent Brendan Witt (D) to the Nashville Predators in exchange for a first-round pick and forward Kris Beech- who was Washington’s first pick in the 1999 draft, going 7th overall. The Caps then sent former San Jose Shark, Jeff Friesen, back to the West Coast as an Anaheim Mighty Duck for a second-round pick in the upcoming draft. They also claimed Rico Fata off waivers from the Atlanta Thrashers. Fata’s speed could potentially be an asset if placed with Ovechkin, who is equally as quick and can give and receive the puck better than any other player on D.C.’s roster.
Boston sent their team’s fifth leading scoring, Sergei Samsanov (37 pts in 55 gms) to the Edmonton Oilers for Marty Reasoner and Yan Stastny and a second-round pick in 2006. The Bruins have struggled all season (12th in the East and three games under .500) and the best thing about this trade is the draft pick, because nothing alludes to the possibility that Reasoner or Stastny will be Bruins next year, especially their stats.
Philadelphia’s GM, Bob Clarke, sent two second-round picks in the 2006 draft and forward Josh Gratton to the Phoenix Coyotes in return for defenseman Denis Gauthier. Earlier in the day, Clarke began his wheeling by shipping an ’06 third-round choice to San Jose for winger Niko Dimotrakos. Philly’s moves were made in typical Clarke fashion- swapping youth and potential for veterans and, hopefully, immediate results which haven’t always been as expedient as the team would like (just look at the number of Rings the Flyer’s have under Clarke’s guidance).
Although yesterday’s final day of trading was action packed, there were few big names moved around. The biggest being Mark Recchi, who was traded to the NHL point leading Carolina Hurricanes. This will give Recchi another solid playoff run and give the Hurricane’s a seasoned veteran’s experience and production in the locker room and on the ice. In net, The Colorado Avelanche and Montreal Canadians swapped goaltenders- Jose Theodore to the Avs and David Aebischer to the Habs. In the whole, there was a lot of micro-managing that occurred, bringing in players who can help in teams’ building processes or fit a particular need some teams were looking to fill. It should be exciting to see how the remainder of the NHL season goes, especially the fights for the final playoff spots in both conferences which are each separated by only three points. In the East, the Montreal Canadians (69 pts) currently hold the eighth playoff spot over Atlanta (66) and in the West, it’s Edmonton’s 73 points barely leading Anahiem with 70 points. The final weeks of the regular season should have a frantic pace as each team tries to maintain its position or climb the standings to make the playoff cut.
The Dubai Ports ordeal:
Dubai Ports World would have only been in charge of daily port operations. THE UNITED STATES COAST GUARD WOULD HAVE REMAINED RESPONSIBLE FOR PORT SECURITY. Yes, that’s right, all this hype- this FEAR generated hype- has no place in the discourse of the issue of whether a foreign, state-owned company should run the six east coast ports it was scheduled to acquire. Foreign entities own ports ops up and down both coasts of the U.S. So, why all of a sudden is there a huge outcry? It’s because the company is from the Middle East. Yet, our politicians will mask their concern by claiming that only America should control its ports and that a state-owned business should not have such access to another country's ports (a legitimate argument if it was made in a broader context that included places like China, a country that is deeply vested in the ports on the West coast). Where was the concern about port security before the Dubai debacle? It was of no concern because it is was in the hands of a non-Arab entity. Let's see how well the U.S.'s PR refutes claims of Arab bashing, becuase that's all it is.
The rejection of the Dubai port deal, without question, is discrimination. Since 9/11, this government, and especially the media, has successfully instilled the wrong kind of fear in people about Muslims. Now, we’re alienating an ally that would have worked within the confines of U.S. law, hardly changed the ports’ daily grind, and enhanced our image as a country that has a problem with Islamic fanatics not the entire Muslim community.
Congress sinking the ports deal, states banning abortion- even in cases of incest and molestation, the gay marriage debate continually existing as an underlying issue with in the public debate arena, the government and religious institutions championing anti-stem cell research campaigns- all this makes it hard to consider the United States as a progressive, tolerant, and intelligent country. It makes us look more regressive and discriminatory; something some of us wished could’ve been left back in the 1950s where it belongs.
Quiksilver Pro 2006- The Gold Coast
The 2006 professional surfing season is under way down under. On Australia's Gold Coast, all 45 pro surfers (plus a few wildcards and alternates, save for injury or poor performance) on the World Championship Tour (WCT) are attempting to unseat Kelly Slater from the WCT Throne. Slater, who won his record 7th title in 2005, is waiting to see how he finishes the Aussie hosted event to determine if he'll go for championship number eight. But he's got solid competition from every direction on this year's tour. Andy and Bruce Irons, Mick Fanning, the Hobgoods, Joel Parkinson, Taj Burrow, Phil McDonald, Fred Patacchia, and the rest of the awe-inspring pros have eleven more events in the 2006 six season after the Quik Pro ends on March 12th. Up next, the Rip Curl pro in Victoria in the Southeast of Australia.
www.fanatasysurfer.com - check it out...it's a great way to pass the time when you're landlocked at the office.
25 trades, 40 players, and the busiest six hours to ever end the NHL trade deadline. Yesterday, between 9am and 3pm- the official deadline- saw more deals than any previous final trading day. A few of the notable transactions from March 9th, 2006:
Some of the wisest moves were made by the Washington Capitals, who continued to take steps to create a foundation of youth and build the team around rookie-phenom Alexander Ovechkin by ridding of two veterans in exchange for two 2006 draft picks. The Caps sent Brendan Witt (D) to the Nashville Predators in exchange for a first-round pick and forward Kris Beech- who was Washington’s first pick in the 1999 draft, going 7th overall. The Caps then sent former San Jose Shark, Jeff Friesen, back to the West Coast as an Anaheim Mighty Duck for a second-round pick in the upcoming draft. They also claimed Rico Fata off waivers from the Atlanta Thrashers. Fata’s speed could potentially be an asset if placed with Ovechkin, who is equally as quick and can give and receive the puck better than any other player on D.C.’s roster.
Boston sent their team’s fifth leading scoring, Sergei Samsanov (37 pts in 55 gms) to the Edmonton Oilers for Marty Reasoner and Yan Stastny and a second-round pick in 2006. The Bruins have struggled all season (12th in the East and three games under .500) and the best thing about this trade is the draft pick, because nothing alludes to the possibility that Reasoner or Stastny will be Bruins next year, especially their stats.
Philadelphia’s GM, Bob Clarke, sent two second-round picks in the 2006 draft and forward Josh Gratton to the Phoenix Coyotes in return for defenseman Denis Gauthier. Earlier in the day, Clarke began his wheeling by shipping an ’06 third-round choice to San Jose for winger Niko Dimotrakos. Philly’s moves were made in typical Clarke fashion- swapping youth and potential for veterans and, hopefully, immediate results which haven’t always been as expedient as the team would like (just look at the number of Rings the Flyer’s have under Clarke’s guidance).
Although yesterday’s final day of trading was action packed, there were few big names moved around. The biggest being Mark Recchi, who was traded to the NHL point leading Carolina Hurricanes. This will give Recchi another solid playoff run and give the Hurricane’s a seasoned veteran’s experience and production in the locker room and on the ice. In net, The Colorado Avelanche and Montreal Canadians swapped goaltenders- Jose Theodore to the Avs and David Aebischer to the Habs. In the whole, there was a lot of micro-managing that occurred, bringing in players who can help in teams’ building processes or fit a particular need some teams were looking to fill. It should be exciting to see how the remainder of the NHL season goes, especially the fights for the final playoff spots in both conferences which are each separated by only three points. In the East, the Montreal Canadians (69 pts) currently hold the eighth playoff spot over Atlanta (66) and in the West, it’s Edmonton’s 73 points barely leading Anahiem with 70 points. The final weeks of the regular season should have a frantic pace as each team tries to maintain its position or climb the standings to make the playoff cut.
The Dubai Ports ordeal:
Dubai Ports World would have only been in charge of daily port operations. THE UNITED STATES COAST GUARD WOULD HAVE REMAINED RESPONSIBLE FOR PORT SECURITY. Yes, that’s right, all this hype- this FEAR generated hype- has no place in the discourse of the issue of whether a foreign, state-owned company should run the six east coast ports it was scheduled to acquire. Foreign entities own ports ops up and down both coasts of the U.S. So, why all of a sudden is there a huge outcry? It’s because the company is from the Middle East. Yet, our politicians will mask their concern by claiming that only America should control its ports and that a state-owned business should not have such access to another country's ports (a legitimate argument if it was made in a broader context that included places like China, a country that is deeply vested in the ports on the West coast). Where was the concern about port security before the Dubai debacle? It was of no concern because it is was in the hands of a non-Arab entity. Let's see how well the U.S.'s PR refutes claims of Arab bashing, becuase that's all it is.
The rejection of the Dubai port deal, without question, is discrimination. Since 9/11, this government, and especially the media, has successfully instilled the wrong kind of fear in people about Muslims. Now, we’re alienating an ally that would have worked within the confines of U.S. law, hardly changed the ports’ daily grind, and enhanced our image as a country that has a problem with Islamic fanatics not the entire Muslim community.
Congress sinking the ports deal, states banning abortion- even in cases of incest and molestation, the gay marriage debate continually existing as an underlying issue with in the public debate arena, the government and religious institutions championing anti-stem cell research campaigns- all this makes it hard to consider the United States as a progressive, tolerant, and intelligent country. It makes us look more regressive and discriminatory; something some of us wished could’ve been left back in the 1950s where it belongs.
Quiksilver Pro 2006- The Gold Coast
The 2006 professional surfing season is under way down under. On Australia's Gold Coast, all 45 pro surfers (plus a few wildcards and alternates, save for injury or poor performance) on the World Championship Tour (WCT) are attempting to unseat Kelly Slater from the WCT Throne. Slater, who won his record 7th title in 2005, is waiting to see how he finishes the Aussie hosted event to determine if he'll go for championship number eight. But he's got solid competition from every direction on this year's tour. Andy and Bruce Irons, Mick Fanning, the Hobgoods, Joel Parkinson, Taj Burrow, Phil McDonald, Fred Patacchia, and the rest of the awe-inspring pros have eleven more events in the 2006 six season after the Quik Pro ends on March 12th. Up next, the Rip Curl pro in Victoria in the Southeast of Australia.
www.fanatasysurfer.com - check it out...it's a great way to pass the time when you're landlocked at the office.
Thursday, March 9, 2006
"How About Putting a Man In an Apartment?"
I found this little blurb about homelessness accidentally. I wasn't exactly proactively searching for a first-person, real life account of homelessness from a victim of homelessness; it sort of just happened. Still, accident or not, this guy's short bio will- and should- knock you on your ass. The weird thing is that, aside from a few misspellings and a grammatical error or two, Michael Brown (dude's name) is really not a bad writer- a testament to the fact that homelessness and financial peril aren't limited strictly to the uneducated. His experiences lend his words greater pertinence and authenticity. Brown voices- I'm sure inadvertantly- a view similar to that of my favorite comedian, David Cross, when he burns the government for its homeless problem. I'm paraphrasing here, but I'm going to put Cross's joke into quotes because I'd recall it verbatim if I had't forgotten it already, "Yeah, we're putting a man on the moon...great, how about putting a man in an apartment?!" I mean, seriously, that simple sentiment may sound banal to most folks who spend their evenings sleeping in thermastat-controlled rooms, under dry, warm IKEA sheets, but it can frustrate a lot of those who find themselves residing underneath the same underpasses where middle-America lets their dogs shit.More power to Michael Brown and I hope I can be in a position to help this cat one day.
(Funny thing about the guy's name- Mike Brown- for all we know, since he's ostensibly out of a job, it could be former FEMA director Brown. Unfortunately, this Mike Brown is probably a good guy who's looking to work hard and take responsibility for himself- a sort of deviation from the inept, one-time FEMA director who, while thousands of hurricane victims were in the process of becoming homeless, jobless, penniless, and/or dead, was preoccupied with how his less-than fashionable ass appeared on FoxNEWS.)
(Funny thing about the guy's name- Mike Brown- for all we know, since he's ostensibly out of a job, it could be former FEMA director Brown. Unfortunately, this Mike Brown is probably a good guy who's looking to work hard and take responsibility for himself- a sort of deviation from the inept, one-time FEMA director who, while thousands of hurricane victims were in the process of becoming homeless, jobless, penniless, and/or dead, was preoccupied with how his less-than fashionable ass appeared on FoxNEWS.)
Stripping down Strip Clubs
by: Colin Farrell (no...not that one)
Okay, so strip clubs. i'm really torn on the subject. i mean, i've never in my life claimed to hate boobs. they're fantastic, nothing else needs to be said. but i'm really of two minds when it comes to actually visiting these fine establishments. they're fun, they're funny, you get to drink beer and look at naked broads. fine. as i've explained many times, it's more humorous than it is exciting. that having been said, the beer is almost always overpriced (unless you're talking about al's diamond cabaret, byob) the broads are rarely consistently hot, and are generally overbearing - working you over for a lapdance ten times in an hour.
Speaking of which... i've never once in my life had a lapdance. don't want one. since the first time i experienced blueballs, i've been trying to avoid ever suffering from the condition again. so, why pay some woman $60 to provide something i steer clear of? that's like running 10 miles to go shopping with your girlfriend: a terrible waste of resources, to experience something unbearable. however, sometimes it's a very good time. buy your buddy a lapdance from an ugly stripper. make fun of the creepy old bastards openly ogling the dancers, in an effort to make yourself feel better about actually being there. throw dollar bills when given the target, etc. all good stuff. and sometimes, the strippers surprisingly make good conversation with you (after they realize you are not going to buy a dance, and are not trying to bang them). rare, but entertaining when it happens. here's the worst part. and it's terrible. let's say you're sitting at the bar, and they have dancers performing on the bar top as well as the stage. well, they go around and do a little dance right in front of you. you have to be polite and look and smile, and occasionally give out a dollar (in addition to that $8 bud you're drinking). generally, the girl dancing looks at you when she gets in front of you, a mutual smile is exchanged rather than any words, and she stares off into the distance while dropping her ass to her heels right in front of you - the whole time considering what she needs to pick up at the grocery store after work. SOMETIMES, she's dancing, you look at the situation in front of you and casually look up, to find that the dancer is accidentally looking back down at you and you make eye contact. THE WORST! (i've killed bitches for looking me in the eye)
In that brief second where you're sharing a confused grin, you both realize how terrible it is that you're in your respective positions. it puts a damper on the evening and you have to drink a lot more to not feel bad about yourself. of course, feeling bad about yourself is a big part of the reason you go to strip clubs in the first place. or maybe that's just the catholic in me talking. either way, you can understand why i don't go that often. well, that and the time i got VD from sitting on a bar stool. differenty story though.
Okay, so strip clubs. i'm really torn on the subject. i mean, i've never in my life claimed to hate boobs. they're fantastic, nothing else needs to be said. but i'm really of two minds when it comes to actually visiting these fine establishments. they're fun, they're funny, you get to drink beer and look at naked broads. fine. as i've explained many times, it's more humorous than it is exciting. that having been said, the beer is almost always overpriced (unless you're talking about al's diamond cabaret, byob) the broads are rarely consistently hot, and are generally overbearing - working you over for a lapdance ten times in an hour.
Speaking of which... i've never once in my life had a lapdance. don't want one. since the first time i experienced blueballs, i've been trying to avoid ever suffering from the condition again. so, why pay some woman $60 to provide something i steer clear of? that's like running 10 miles to go shopping with your girlfriend: a terrible waste of resources, to experience something unbearable. however, sometimes it's a very good time. buy your buddy a lapdance from an ugly stripper. make fun of the creepy old bastards openly ogling the dancers, in an effort to make yourself feel better about actually being there. throw dollar bills when given the target, etc. all good stuff. and sometimes, the strippers surprisingly make good conversation with you (after they realize you are not going to buy a dance, and are not trying to bang them). rare, but entertaining when it happens. here's the worst part. and it's terrible. let's say you're sitting at the bar, and they have dancers performing on the bar top as well as the stage. well, they go around and do a little dance right in front of you. you have to be polite and look and smile, and occasionally give out a dollar (in addition to that $8 bud you're drinking). generally, the girl dancing looks at you when she gets in front of you, a mutual smile is exchanged rather than any words, and she stares off into the distance while dropping her ass to her heels right in front of you - the whole time considering what she needs to pick up at the grocery store after work. SOMETIMES, she's dancing, you look at the situation in front of you and casually look up, to find that the dancer is accidentally looking back down at you and you make eye contact. THE WORST! (i've killed bitches for looking me in the eye)
In that brief second where you're sharing a confused grin, you both realize how terrible it is that you're in your respective positions. it puts a damper on the evening and you have to drink a lot more to not feel bad about yourself. of course, feeling bad about yourself is a big part of the reason you go to strip clubs in the first place. or maybe that's just the catholic in me talking. either way, you can understand why i don't go that often. well, that and the time i got VD from sitting on a bar stool. differenty story though.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)