Cammalleri or the Sedins?

Brian Burke has not publicly stated who he'll be targeting on July 1st, but logic dictates his focus will be deadlocked on Unrestricted Free Agents Mike Cammalleri or the Sedins.

After many critics--fans and writers alike--expressed their discontent towards Burke's inactivity at the NHL Entry Draft last weekend, you can bet Burke will be looking to make a big splash once July 1st comes swinging. While he managed to draft seven North American players at the draft, most of them at behemoth size, he failed to import more prospects and draft picks by not pulling the trigger on any deals.

Lucky for Burke, Free Agency Day kicks off almost immediately after the draft, so if he really does care what his critics are complaining about (doubt it) he can now make amends. Burke stated that he will not watch the same team that was displayed last season, so one way or another, you can expect change. While he'll be able to dispose much of his players via trade, it's unlikely they will garner a return valuable enough to upgrade the team's woes. While the stock of Leafs defensemen Tomas Kaberle and Pavel Kubina has surely risen due to the Chris Pronger and Jay Bouwmeester deals, it's unlikely trading one of the defenseman will suffice in Burke's "master plan."

While Cammalleri or the Sedins hardly constitute as a "Burke-type player," they are offensively gifted forwards who would implement an immediate impact to the team's long-term goals, not to mention the goals for category. And it's not as if their defensive game leaves much to be desired. While they lack in the grit and size departments, it shouldn't be too much of an issue if they’re surrounded by bigger players. And judging from Burke's draftees this year, I'd say that won't be much of problem.

The question, however, is what UFA's to target. Should Burke focus his attention towards the Sedins, or should he try to ink Cammelleri to a contract? Personally, the prospect of signing Cammalleri seems the most enticing. While his resume is less impressive than the Sedins, he'll probably cost the Leafs around 5 million dollars in cap hit, while the Sedins would cost near the 15 million vicinity. Signing Cammalleri would also allow the Leafs to award more roster spots to gritty, two-way forwards. If the Sedins sign in Toronto, then the Leafs' top-six, should they re-sign Mikhail Grabovski, will compromise of many one-dimensional forwards. And frankly, I'd rather the Leafs avoid getting handcuffed with lucrative, long-term contracts until atleast next summer, when Rick Nash is set to become a UFA.

What do you think? Should the Leafs target the Sedins, or Cammalleri? Or should they avoid both and opt for different UFA's?

Personally, I'd be a pretty happy Leafs fan if Cammalleri is locked up on July 1st. Let the madness unfold!

ronguillet@gmail.com

Read More...

Hits To The Head: Not An Epidemic

There needs to be a line drawn at some point on what is considered a head shot and what is not. The options are there, clearly. Either call them all equally or leave it alone. Tonight's game between Detroit and Anaheim, and the first game of the Chicago/Vancouver series have opened the door to even more signs of head shots but all the calls and fines have been wildly uneven.

Let us look back to Round 1. During the Calgary/Chicago series, Mike Cammalleri punched Martin Havlat in the face off a draw:

There was no penalty on the play, there was no suspension or fine handed out and the league claimed the event to be contained, non-violent and that Cammalleri has no history of violence.

Days prior, this event transpired during a game between the Pittsburgh Penguins and the Philadelphia Flyers - an event that lead to a suspension on Daniel Carcillo:

Carcillo was given a 1 game suspension for the act, and the Flyers head coach, John Stevens, was fined $10,000 because he had the tough guy on the ice during the last few seconds of play. Carcillo was acknowledged as a repeat offender but it does draw some odd lines in the subject.

Players who are not considered repeat offenders get away with a ton of acts, to the point that if they are not fined or suspended for any event they are still listed as "no history of violence". I think we can all remember this situation:

After the fact, the league ruled Chris Neil of having "no history of violence" and thus deemed the hit "legal". Neil, when talking to reporters, spoke proudly of his non-punishable hit and boasted the act. Then, during Game 6 between the Washington Capitals and the New York Rangers, this hit occurs:

What was so different between these hits? Both were late, both were high shots (elbow or not) and both resulting in significant injuries. There is a difference though, the league gave Donald Brashear a 5 game suspension for his hit on Blair Betts due to his "history of violence". Then, Game 1 of the Vancouver series rolls around and Ben Eager is out doing his normal thing - completing his checks and sparking his team:

Ben Eager did not get a penalty on the play, and was not suspended, but does have a history of violence. Then last night, the big hit occurs, Mike Brown hits Jiri Hudler on what is an obvious shot to the head:

There's two things about this hit that needs to be looked at. 1. Was it a bad hit? Yes, unfortunately, Hudler was watching his plan and did not see the hit coming.
2. Was it a late hit? No. If you watch the play and count the seconds it took from Hudler passing the puck to taking the impact, it's exactly 1 second. 3. Was it a high shot? No. Hudler was bent down when he took the hit, following through on the pass he had just got off his stick before taking the impact. Mike Brown was also bent low to bring the hit down to avoid making it a head on shoulder collision. If you watch the replays, Hudler is bent down so low that his head is level with Brown's chest.

It's an unfortunate play and people can rule all these hits as head shots, but the fact is that there is no rule in the rulebook that punishes hits to the head. Should there be? Technically there already is. You never see a guy get called for elbowing someone in the chest, only the head - head shot. You never see a guy get roughing for punching someone in the arm, only the head - head shot. So in an odd way, the rule does exist, but it is not listed in exactly a head shot format.

The only argument that should be made is that intent to injure should be called into question, which is of the referees decision. He ruled the hit to be a major and Brown was ejected from the game and given a 5 Minute Major. Technically, he has already served his punishment and thus a suspension is not in order. There is also the fine line of asking yourself "is every hit thrown in the game intent to injure?" Probably not, but if someone is out there hitting, he's out there to take the player out of the play and if he gets injured on a clean hit then it draws that question into play because the player throwing the hit meant to do so and meant to hit as hard as he had and thus the injury resulted from the impact thrown by the hitter.

But that is not how hockey works. The fact is, every single suspension is a discretionary call; some are fair, some are not. The history of violence can no longer be an excuse, but to consider every hit that results in an injury to be a punishable offense is wrong.

And just because players like Cammalleri are more talented than the Daniel Carcillo's of the game does not mean they should be treated differently. The league needs to treat every case fairly and make the judgment based on several factors:

Was it a late hit?
Was it intent to injure?
Was it clean - and if not, was it already dealt with on the ice?

In Mike Brown's case, it was dealt with.

Micheal A. Aldred
michealaldred@hotmail.com

Read More...

Nothing Flashy, but Off-Season is Where It's At

Sorry Leafs Nation, Brian Burke didn’t splurge on a deal to give Leafs Nation the false hope of a playoff spot. What a shame…

Instead, Burke traded Nik Antropov, Dominic Moore and the Toronto Marlies’ Richard Petiot for two 2nd-round picks (BUF and NYR), a 4th-round pick (TBL), a conditional pick (NYR), Olaf Kolzig (our next savior), Jamie Heward and Andy Rogers. Also, he picked up Martin Gerber (who was sensational tonight in Washington) and Erik Reitz from waivers.


Nothing flashy, but Burke kept to his word, and the Leafs are now in a stronger position going into the 2009 NHL Entry Draft in Montreal on June 26-27. For those who hoped for better returns and/or more players moved from the Leafs, don’t fret, the off-season will mark the official turnaround of a franchise in dire need of one.

The fact the Trade Deadline is so pumped up by the media is the main contributor to the madness that unfolds each season (although General Manager’s were considerably more conservative this time around). GM’s feel the added pressure to fix the woes of their respective clubs, which leads to the trading of prospects, roster players and draft picks – and not surprisingly, the sellers usually come out on top.

While the Leafs were obviously sellers going into March 4th, Burke had some delicate situations with blueliners Tomas Kaberle and Pavel Kubina, who each have a no-trade clause in their contracts. Because of John Ferguson Jr.’s spectacular business decisions, Burke had to be wary of the value of his defensemen. The scrutiny of the Deadline (cap restrictions + attempting to bolster line-up during the season) minimizes the amount of potential suitors, so Burke’s options were limited. While he may not be in a position to demand a 1st round pick, a prospect and roster player, he will have a larger amount of teams interested in his blueliners, so that means a wider array of prospects and draft picks to consider.

It would have been nice if the Leafs were free from the oppression of the NTC, especially considering the asking price for Kaberle, but there’s no rush to unload the Leafs’ core just yet. After all, Burke joined the Leafs just recently, so analyzing his club for the rest of the season may be a crucial step in deciding who is worthy of being apart of the rebuilding plan in Toronto.

The Leafs’ youth can’t do it on their own, so is keeping atleast one blueliner in Kaberle and Kubina important? And which one? Kubina is on a tear of late, and would be an excellent mentor for the Leafs’ blueline. Kaberle is an important factor the Leafs’ PP, and although he lacks the defensive game to be a two-way contributor, he’d serve as a mentor for up-and-comer Anton Stralman – who has been progressing nicely.

Kaberle and Kubina aside, the Leafs are free of NTC’s this off-season. Not only that, but their core players, who are all signed on for the 2009-10 season, all have movable contracts. So if Burke wants to give this team a make-over, he’ll be more than capable of doing it – and the fact that Antropov and Moore are subtracted from the line-up is already a shake-up.

For once, the Leafs will have the luxury of cap space with 8.75M at their disposal going into the off-season. While the Leafs’ pivotal moment will be the Entry Draft this summer, July 1st can play a big role to the Leafs’ rebuilding plan.

Take a look at some of the UFA’s available this year:

D Francois Beauchemin (29)

RW Maxim Afinogenov (29)

C Mike Cammaleri (27)

D Jordan Leopold (28)

LW David Moss (27)

LW Martin Havlat (28)

G Andrew Raycroft (29)– I kid, I kid.

C Johan Franzen (29)

D Jay Bouwmeester (25)

D Kurtis Foster (27)

LW Marian Gaborik (27)

D Mike Komisarek (27) — long shot, will likely re-sign with Habs.

LW Alex Tanguay (29)

D Ville Koistinen (27)

LW Taylor Pyatt (27)

If the Leafs can collect more draft picks and/or prospects this off-season, coupled with some key UFA signings (with fair contracts, mind you) the Leafs can finally take the first step in finding the remedy to this 41-year Cup drought.

In Burke we trust.

ronguillet@gmail.com

Read More...