In the wake of announcements made by Gary Bettman about the seriousness that the NHL is going to start ascribing to head hits, this week the NHL Wheel of Justice assessed Dany Heatley 2 games for a deliberate (if not very injurious) elbow to the head of Steve Ott, Lecavalier was handed a game misconduct for a deliberate high-stick to PK Subban’s head, and even Bruin Brad Marchand is getting a suspension for an unpenalized play. Given that the GMs have just finished a meeting specifically addressing concussions and head hits (among other things), it’s worth asking whether the league has done enough to address what a lot of hockey minds seem to think is a key issue facing the game today?
Ken Dryden, Habs legend and one of the more intelligent players to ever grace the game, had a very smart piece in the Globe and Mail last Friday where he compares today’s perceptions of head hits to yesteryear’s perceptions of the health risks of smoking (i.e. none) and asks the question: "How could we be so stupid?" This is a valid point, and 20 or 30 years from now I think many doctors and family members will be asking the same question. It is all too easy to think of our players as gladiators and heroes, and that head trauma is just part of earning their stripes; part of the the job.
This certainly seems to be the outlook of the NHL executive committee, with very little about head hits and concussions coming of this week’s GM meeting. What we got was a very public 5-point "action plan" from Gary Bettman after the first day, which seemingly calmed sponsors by making it sound like the league is really going to do something. My feelings are obviously a little mixed on the subject. I certainly hate their data on the source of concussions – especially the category labelled "accidental hits." According to their classifications, the Chara hit would have been "accidental" simply because it wasn’t ruled as intentional (i.e. suspension-worthy) by the executive, and I don’t think this provides a very meaningful representation of the data.
One point I was very happy with, and that was the new protocol for determining what constituted a potential concussion threat and how the teams are expected to react. Clear rules are set for what scenario requires an intervention by the team doctor, and the player is removed to “a quiet place free from distraction” for examination with a validated acute concussion assessment tool. These are good steps, most of all because they are clear, logical, and will probably improve the prognosis for players with concussions dramatically. In fact, the only way that this could be better is if doctors had an obligation to share data from tests (maybe at season’s end) for use in evaluating how various rule or equipment changes affect concussion rates.
The rest of the list I’m less excited about. The first item is for Brendan Shanahan to lead an investigation into whether equipment size can be reduced without compromising safety. I think that the answer is a resounding “yes.” Equipment size has grown rather dramatically over the past three decades, mostly in the name of player safety. However, I wonder whether this has backfired somewhat; protection against higher forces seems to have encouraged harder hits, and likely leads to less forgiving impacts between players. It is important to remember that no equipment can protect a player completely from injury, however, and that changes made at a cultural level might be more effective in reducing concussions.
The second, related, item is the naming of Joe Nieuwendyk, Rob Blake, Steve Yzerman and Brendan Shanahan to a committee investigating concussions and concussion-related issues. I have tremendous respect for all of these men as hockey players, but have less faith their ability to ask smart, testable questions about why concussions have been on the rise, and supervise the data collection and analysis required for this job. I’m biased, being a scientist, but I’d like to see people who do this kind of analysis for a living doing this work.
Which brings me to the next point, which is the hiring of an independent safety consulting team to tour the 30 NHL arenas to ensure they conform to the highest safety standards. My question is: how is this not a routine procedure for the league? The same could be said for the last point, which is penalizing teams as a whole for repeated offences by multiple players, though I can’t find anything saying 1) how many offences it takes to become a “repeat offender, or 2) how many “repeated offenders” would qualify as enough for a fine or other punishment.
What I hate most about this is that, unlike the new head injury protocol, it doesn’t seem to be clear, logical, or structured. It requires on-the-fly judgement calls that will lead to inconsistent rulings from referees and the disciplinary committee, which is why so many of us refer to them as the "Wheel of Justice." Inconsistency and judgement calls are ruining the punitive structure of the league both on the ice and in suspensions (although our friend Down Goes Brown seems to have the suspensions figured out). Decades of psychology research have shown that if punishment is not consistent, it doesn’t change behaviour, and that’s what we’re seeing on the ice.
My dad and I were talking about this last night, and came up with a good example: in the old days (for me this means the 1980s), 3 steps and leaving your feet meant a whistle and 2 minutes for charging. Now, charging is a rather abstract concept because, as Colin Campbell freely admits in his emails (remember those?), referees are more or less expected to be inconsistent by making calls based on the score, the number of previous penalties and the flow of the game. Bad judgement by the referee on some stickplay between Subban and Lacavalier in front of the net last night led to frustration and the eventual 2-handed blow to Subban’s face that saw Vinny ejected. It never should have gone that far, even if it meant 2 minutes for PK and none for Lacavalier.
I think overall the league has taken some steps in the right direction by introducing independent safety consultants, clear criteria for high-risk hits, and protocols for how deal with these hits. However, we’ve been taking a lot of steps in the wrong direction over the last couple years in terms of man-games lost to injury. Until the punitive structures are made more severe and consistent, I think we’ll continue to watch that stat rise.
Showing posts with label Heatley. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Heatley. Show all posts
Friday, March 18, 2011
Friday, August 07, 2009
The Puzzling Case Of Alex Tanguay, Free Agent
Alex Tanguay fired his negligent agent last week (but reported yesterday). It's about time, don't you think?
Agents aside, there has to be some reason teams have not been orderly forming a queue to Alex Tanguay's door. I'm not saying the agent doesn't hold some responsibility here. But let's be honest, if an NHL team wanted Tanguay, really wanted him, they'd have been able to get in touch, circumvent a trouble-maker agent.
So just what are the alternative explanations? I'm can't be sure, but let me speculate:
Tanguay himself is holding up the process
1) Tanguay is being picky
Not an uncommon trait among NHLers. You'll all remember Mats Sundin. Before him there were others. If a player isn't blown away on day 1 with a big offer, what is the rush to sign really? Alex may be waiting for the right situation to fall into place, turning other offers away as he goes. We do know this much:
2) Tanguay's being unrealistic
The past few seasons, Tanguay has been a near $6 million man. It may be that he fancies himself the same player as when he signed that contract. While he's probably right about his own skills, what he has to understand is that money has been pouring out into other players' pockets over the time he's been waiting.
You know what, he does realise this. He's no fool. I doubt this is the problem.
A negligent agent botched the process
3) Tanguay's agent missed or didn't return calls
Given Sauve's history and experience, you'd have to think that he didn't. Whether he did or not is something that we'll never know. We do know this: he's been fired. Someone named Tanguay thinks Sauve has something to do with this puzzling situation.
4) Tanguay's agent gave bad advice
Perhaps it was agent not player who misjudged the temperature of the water here with salary and term demands. With the speed at which the Canadiens and other teams filled their needs this July, it wouldn't take much bad judgment to get you to July 4th in a very bad position.
NHL GMs don't prioritise players like Tanguay
5) NHL GMs are waiting for Heatley, Kessel and Zherdev
Tanguay doesn't exist in a vacuum. Heatley and Kessel both represent hotter commodities than Tanguay. It may be that GMs don't want to tie their hands with Tanguay when the could be in the Heatley/Kessel game. The same is true, though to a lesser extent, for players like Zherdev.
6) NHL GMs see him as a complementary player
Early in his career, it would have been fair to suspect that Tanguay was merely a complement to those around him, albeit a very good complement. Really though, I say this because this is what I saw this season from Tanguay. From my limited viewings, I saw him as a very good potentiator for Koivu and/or Kovalev; but he looked like he needed skill to produce.
Perhaps NHL GMs spotted this as well. It could well be that this is holding up the process. For one thing, Tanguay would need a player to be a complement to. No use Nashville or Florida signing him – because why would you spend millions to make a Legwand or a Weiss line slightly more effective. Tanguay is at his best when he potentiates the Sakics, Iginlas and Lecavaliers of the league, where a 25% boost translates into many points and even extra wins.
7) NHL GMs think he's hard work
Again, pure speculation. But one fact that led me to this is the time he had in Calgary. Tanguay did not thrive when he was asked to adopt that system and it may have hurt his value.
When it comes to the Canadiens, I couldn't help but notice that he was a lot chattier when Carbonneau was dispatched. I'm guessing he didn't appreciate Carbonneau's style either.
Two coaches in two years. To an outsider that sometimes looks like the constant in the equation might be the problem, rather than the variable.
8) NHL GMs don't think he's value for money
This goes a little bit with all of the above and will change depending on the salary and term demand. I don't think there's much argument to be made about him not being worth his salary from last season anymore. In a world where you can sign Hossa for a lesser cap hit and lock up Zetterberg for the same amount, Tanguay just doesn't belong there.
But how far has he slid on demands? Let's say to $4 million. Is it possible NHL GMs would balk at that too? I'd suggest that many would.
When it comes to it with Tanguay, I am truly puzzled. His continued availability is baffling to me because despite the fact I call him complementary and even needy, he is still just a very very skillful player.
Back in December, when we played the Flames, I wrote a little treatise on Tanguay. I think it holds today. Yes, he floats, he's dependent on others and is laid back; but hockey is a team game. There is room for an Alex Tanguay on almost any team (I still don't see Nashville, Toronto or Calgary, but the other 27).
His numbers, after all, don't lie. He has 193 career goals to go with 387 career assists in 659 games. Since the lockout, he's assisted on 173 goals over 300 games – a great clip – and shown he can adapt to play with players other than Forsberg and Sakic. His skills are much rarer than a 6'4" frame with no defensive awareness, and are what GMs should be using their money to buy. I can see why 2 consecutive GMs have opted for Cammalleri to replace him, but Brian Gionta and Todd Bertuzzi – these I can't justify...
When it comes to reality and why he's still in limbo, I think it's probably a little from column A, B and C. Tanguay probably needs to be less picky and demanding, his new agent must be better than his old for his case and NHL GMs must meet him in the middle.
If I were entering a pool as to the next player to be signed in this league, my money would be squarely on Tanguay.
Agents aside, there has to be some reason teams have not been orderly forming a queue to Alex Tanguay's door. I'm not saying the agent doesn't hold some responsibility here. But let's be honest, if an NHL team wanted Tanguay, really wanted him, they'd have been able to get in touch, circumvent a trouble-maker agent.
So just what are the alternative explanations? I'm can't be sure, but let me speculate:
Tanguay himself is holding up the process
1) Tanguay is being picky
Not an uncommon trait among NHLers. You'll all remember Mats Sundin. Before him there were others. If a player isn't blown away on day 1 with a big offer, what is the rush to sign really? Alex may be waiting for the right situation to fall into place, turning other offers away as he goes. We do know this much:
"Tanguay est fort intéressé à jouer pour le Lightning. On avance qu'il serait prêt à accepter un contrat d'un an juste pour avoir la chance de jouer aux côtés des Vincent Lecavalier, Martin Saint-Louis et Steven Stamkos."
Tanguay's very interested in playing for the Lightning. It's suggested that he'd be prepared to take a one year contract for the chance to play with Lecavalier, St. Louis and Stamkos.
2) Tanguay's being unrealistic
The past few seasons, Tanguay has been a near $6 million man. It may be that he fancies himself the same player as when he signed that contract. While he's probably right about his own skills, what he has to understand is that money has been pouring out into other players' pockets over the time he's been waiting.
You know what, he does realise this. He's no fool. I doubt this is the problem.
A negligent agent botched the process
3) Tanguay's agent missed or didn't return calls
Given Sauve's history and experience, you'd have to think that he didn't. Whether he did or not is something that we'll never know. We do know this: he's been fired. Someone named Tanguay thinks Sauve has something to do with this puzzling situation.
4) Tanguay's agent gave bad advice
Perhaps it was agent not player who misjudged the temperature of the water here with salary and term demands. With the speed at which the Canadiens and other teams filled their needs this July, it wouldn't take much bad judgment to get you to July 4th in a very bad position.
NHL GMs don't prioritise players like Tanguay
5) NHL GMs are waiting for Heatley, Kessel and Zherdev
Tanguay doesn't exist in a vacuum. Heatley and Kessel both represent hotter commodities than Tanguay. It may be that GMs don't want to tie their hands with Tanguay when the could be in the Heatley/Kessel game. The same is true, though to a lesser extent, for players like Zherdev.
6) NHL GMs see him as a complementary player
Early in his career, it would have been fair to suspect that Tanguay was merely a complement to those around him, albeit a very good complement. Really though, I say this because this is what I saw this season from Tanguay. From my limited viewings, I saw him as a very good potentiator for Koivu and/or Kovalev; but he looked like he needed skill to produce.
Perhaps NHL GMs spotted this as well. It could well be that this is holding up the process. For one thing, Tanguay would need a player to be a complement to. No use Nashville or Florida signing him – because why would you spend millions to make a Legwand or a Weiss line slightly more effective. Tanguay is at his best when he potentiates the Sakics, Iginlas and Lecavaliers of the league, where a 25% boost translates into many points and even extra wins.
7) NHL GMs think he's hard work
Again, pure speculation. But one fact that led me to this is the time he had in Calgary. Tanguay did not thrive when he was asked to adopt that system and it may have hurt his value.
When it comes to the Canadiens, I couldn't help but notice that he was a lot chattier when Carbonneau was dispatched. I'm guessing he didn't appreciate Carbonneau's style either.
Two coaches in two years. To an outsider that sometimes looks like the constant in the equation might be the problem, rather than the variable.
8) NHL GMs don't think he's value for money
This goes a little bit with all of the above and will change depending on the salary and term demand. I don't think there's much argument to be made about him not being worth his salary from last season anymore. In a world where you can sign Hossa for a lesser cap hit and lock up Zetterberg for the same amount, Tanguay just doesn't belong there.
But how far has he slid on demands? Let's say to $4 million. Is it possible NHL GMs would balk at that too? I'd suggest that many would.
When it comes to it with Tanguay, I am truly puzzled. His continued availability is baffling to me because despite the fact I call him complementary and even needy, he is still just a very very skillful player.
Back in December, when we played the Flames, I wrote a little treatise on Tanguay. I think it holds today. Yes, he floats, he's dependent on others and is laid back; but hockey is a team game. There is room for an Alex Tanguay on almost any team (I still don't see Nashville, Toronto or Calgary, but the other 27).
His numbers, after all, don't lie. He has 193 career goals to go with 387 career assists in 659 games. Since the lockout, he's assisted on 173 goals over 300 games – a great clip – and shown he can adapt to play with players other than Forsberg and Sakic. His skills are much rarer than a 6'4" frame with no defensive awareness, and are what GMs should be using their money to buy. I can see why 2 consecutive GMs have opted for Cammalleri to replace him, but Brian Gionta and Todd Bertuzzi – these I can't justify...
When it comes to reality and why he's still in limbo, I think it's probably a little from column A, B and C. Tanguay probably needs to be less picky and demanding, his new agent must be better than his old for his case and NHL GMs must meet him in the middle.
If I were entering a pool as to the next player to be signed in this league, my money would be squarely on Tanguay.
Friday, June 12, 2009
Information Leak
Tanguay Not Priority One
With Canadiens info as rare this month as a Russian source for La Presse with credibility, it is with some glee that I can add this latest rumour to the mix.
The Fourth Period (with a record credible enough for me) has signalled that Alex Tanguay's agent has had contact with Bob Gainey. According to the report, it happened (briefly) this Wednesday. Not very interesting in itself, the juicy part of the report was this quote from Tangauy's agent, Bob Sauve:
Another priority?
For the sake of our amusement, I am going to assume that this priority is not the sale of the team. For one thing, it will be more fun. For another, if Gainey is unable to think about re-signing players for the Montreal Canadiens because the prospective owners might be in disagreement – this will be the last fun we will have for the forseeable future.
So, a player of higher priority. It's worth reminding ourselves of the possibilities:
1) The Canadiens have 10 pending UFAs they could re-sign
The total without Tanguay, of course, is 9. They are, to refresh our memories: Koivu, Kovalev, Lang, Kostopoulos, Schneider, Komisarek, Bouillon, Dandenault and Brisebois.
If Tanguay is not the priority, Gainey could be looking at Koivu, Kovalev or possibly Komisarek. I think we could rule out Kostopoulos, Brisebois, Bouillon and Dandenault as first signing of the summer. It would be terrible PR, not to mention a poor example of team building. ONly Koivu and Kovalev are realistic after Komo's brutal displays of hit-rather-than-defend.
2) The Canadiens have 5 pending RFAs to re-sign
These guys don't have to be signed by July 1, so traditionally if not signed by now, they'll wait to see what the post-UFA kitty looks like. I don't see that being different this season. The guys are: Plekanec, Higgins, Latendresse, Chipchura and D'Agostini.
3) The Canadiens have long been rumoured to be working on a deal for Lecavalier
This possibility fits as precedent to Tanguay. No use ruling out a good big trade by handing too much money over to a free agent right now.
4) The Canadiens will be signing new UFAs
There's no doubt the Habs will have to bring in new blood if and when they don't re-sign all the outgoing. Gainey might be making July 1 his priority. The one thing that makes me think this less likely is that this strategy would be an awful risk as some targets could yet re-sign with former teams. Gainey may be a lot of things, but risk-taker? Not that I recall.
5) The oft-ignored possibility of trading up in the draft
Just because Gainey hasn't been talking up his ability to trade up since January, it doesn't mean he wouldn't consider it. Players like Tavares, and my preference, Hedman don't come along every year. Whatever one can give for Lecavalier might be enough to move.
6) The Canadiens have another trade in the works
The Habs aren't restricted to dealing for Lecavalier, despite what the media might wish for. We've heard rumblings about Daniel Briere (please no!); but then there could be others: Kovalchuk, Heatley, Doan, Morrow or anyone else you could dream up. All four here can be sourced to my keyboard, but with $25 million to spare, no one is out of bounds, at least for enquiry.
7) Nothing gets done until the exact salary cap number is known
Carries the risk of the waiting for UFAs, as other teams might not operate with such caution as they snap up players who are worth snapping up. The thing that scares me is that Gainey is sometimes this cautious.
8) Tanguay's rights could be traded as a commodity
This is by far the more far-fetched idea. We know that Tanguay signed and delivered only drew a couple of picks for Calgary last spring. Tanguay unsigned in a bull market – that's a low pick, isn't it?
If you take a look at Tanguay, the player, it's perhaps not too surprising that he isn't priority number one for an NHL team – especially one that could be looking for a number one centre and right wing if they sign him as the cornerstone player. However, being Montreal, and the fact that Tanguay does carry the favoured trait of fluency for RDS's second intermission interview; one could see how the French Canadian might have been at least equal top among free agents.
Perhaps it's the romantic in me, but I tend to believe that Bob Sauve's statement indicates trade. The pessimist in me is clearly at play too, as I can't see the Montreal Canadiens asking Tanguay to hold on while they sign this hockey fan's choice of the UFAs – Saku Koivu.
The trade just adds up. But which trade will it be?
Personally, I think the Lecavalier trade is too difficult. I think Tampa will overvalue their centre and will play Montreal off other suitors. I would be surprised if Gainey pulled it off while keeping a grasp on any semblance of his reputation as a good hockey GM.
Lost in all the Lecavalier talk, though, is the clear willingness of Gainey and his team to significantly re-jig their outfit. When a GM is willing to toss in prospects and young players as he clearly was based on previous Vinny leaks, then the transferability to another deal is oh so very do-able.
Discarding the Vinny trade means opening the NHL up in its entirety, with endless targets. But being that we're sensible and like to discuss, let's come up with a list (based on some logic) as to who Tanguay is waiting for here...
My 5 aspirational targets are:
Ilya Kovalchuk
Dany Heatley
Jeff Carter
Ales Hemsky
Number one or two pick 2009
... and for good measure, Martin St Louis (the consistent option from Tampa)
A lot to draw from two sentences. Maybe they were very telling. Then again, maybe two months without a game isn't healthy...
The Fourth Period (with a record credible enough for me) has signalled that Alex Tanguay's agent has had contact with Bob Gainey. According to the report, it happened (briefly) this Wednesday. Not very interesting in itself, the juicy part of the report was this quote from Tangauy's agent, Bob Sauve:
"I had a discussion with Bob Gainey yesterday and the Canadiens currently have another priority," Sauve told CKAC. "We'll wait for that priority [to be taken care of] and then the Canadiens will speak to us about Alex."
Another priority?
For the sake of our amusement, I am going to assume that this priority is not the sale of the team. For one thing, it will be more fun. For another, if Gainey is unable to think about re-signing players for the Montreal Canadiens because the prospective owners might be in disagreement – this will be the last fun we will have for the forseeable future.
So, a player of higher priority. It's worth reminding ourselves of the possibilities:
1) The Canadiens have 10 pending UFAs they could re-sign
The total without Tanguay, of course, is 9. They are, to refresh our memories: Koivu, Kovalev, Lang, Kostopoulos, Schneider, Komisarek, Bouillon, Dandenault and Brisebois.
If Tanguay is not the priority, Gainey could be looking at Koivu, Kovalev or possibly Komisarek. I think we could rule out Kostopoulos, Brisebois, Bouillon and Dandenault as first signing of the summer. It would be terrible PR, not to mention a poor example of team building. ONly Koivu and Kovalev are realistic after Komo's brutal displays of hit-rather-than-defend.
2) The Canadiens have 5 pending RFAs to re-sign
These guys don't have to be signed by July 1, so traditionally if not signed by now, they'll wait to see what the post-UFA kitty looks like. I don't see that being different this season. The guys are: Plekanec, Higgins, Latendresse, Chipchura and D'Agostini.
3) The Canadiens have long been rumoured to be working on a deal for Lecavalier
This possibility fits as precedent to Tanguay. No use ruling out a good big trade by handing too much money over to a free agent right now.
4) The Canadiens will be signing new UFAs
There's no doubt the Habs will have to bring in new blood if and when they don't re-sign all the outgoing. Gainey might be making July 1 his priority. The one thing that makes me think this less likely is that this strategy would be an awful risk as some targets could yet re-sign with former teams. Gainey may be a lot of things, but risk-taker? Not that I recall.
5) The oft-ignored possibility of trading up in the draft
Just because Gainey hasn't been talking up his ability to trade up since January, it doesn't mean he wouldn't consider it. Players like Tavares, and my preference, Hedman don't come along every year. Whatever one can give for Lecavalier might be enough to move.
6) The Canadiens have another trade in the works
The Habs aren't restricted to dealing for Lecavalier, despite what the media might wish for. We've heard rumblings about Daniel Briere (please no!); but then there could be others: Kovalchuk, Heatley, Doan, Morrow or anyone else you could dream up. All four here can be sourced to my keyboard, but with $25 million to spare, no one is out of bounds, at least for enquiry.
7) Nothing gets done until the exact salary cap number is known
Carries the risk of the waiting for UFAs, as other teams might not operate with such caution as they snap up players who are worth snapping up. The thing that scares me is that Gainey is sometimes this cautious.
8) Tanguay's rights could be traded as a commodity
This is by far the more far-fetched idea. We know that Tanguay signed and delivered only drew a couple of picks for Calgary last spring. Tanguay unsigned in a bull market – that's a low pick, isn't it?
If you take a look at Tanguay, the player, it's perhaps not too surprising that he isn't priority number one for an NHL team – especially one that could be looking for a number one centre and right wing if they sign him as the cornerstone player. However, being Montreal, and the fact that Tanguay does carry the favoured trait of fluency for RDS's second intermission interview; one could see how the French Canadian might have been at least equal top among free agents.
Perhaps it's the romantic in me, but I tend to believe that Bob Sauve's statement indicates trade. The pessimist in me is clearly at play too, as I can't see the Montreal Canadiens asking Tanguay to hold on while they sign this hockey fan's choice of the UFAs – Saku Koivu.
The trade just adds up. But which trade will it be?
Personally, I think the Lecavalier trade is too difficult. I think Tampa will overvalue their centre and will play Montreal off other suitors. I would be surprised if Gainey pulled it off while keeping a grasp on any semblance of his reputation as a good hockey GM.
Lost in all the Lecavalier talk, though, is the clear willingness of Gainey and his team to significantly re-jig their outfit. When a GM is willing to toss in prospects and young players as he clearly was based on previous Vinny leaks, then the transferability to another deal is oh so very do-able.
Discarding the Vinny trade means opening the NHL up in its entirety, with endless targets. But being that we're sensible and like to discuss, let's come up with a list (based on some logic) as to who Tanguay is waiting for here...
My 5 aspirational targets are:
Ilya Kovalchuk
Dany Heatley
Jeff Carter
Ales Hemsky
Number one or two pick 2009
... and for good measure, Martin St Louis (the consistent option from Tampa)
A lot to draw from two sentences. Maybe they were very telling. Then again, maybe two months without a game isn't healthy...
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)