From The Mind Of Tom

Sean Avery Supports Marriage Equality

2011-05-07T20:56:00.004-05:00

It was recently released by ESPN New York that Rangers' forward Sean Avery publicly voiced his support for marriage equality. Yeah, that's right. The ever-so-touchy subject of gay marriage.

As a fellow supporter of equal rights for all Americans and humans alike, naturally I am all for this. I have made it quite clear that I believe all people, regardless of sexual orientation, deserve the right to marry the person they love, regardless of gender.

My views of gender equality apply just about everywhere. Sports included. Genetics dictating one's gender should not dictate one's ability to play hockey or basketball or whatever. Just look at the NCAA's women's divisions. The WNBA. Canada's own women's hockey league. Athletics don't discriminate. American law shouldn't either.

It's no secret I've been pretty harsh on Sean Avery over the years, thanks to his actions on the ice. But, like with most players, that does not carry over to his life off the ice.

Avery is not the only professional athlete to speak out in support of equality.
Baltimore Ravens' linebacker Brendon Ayanbadejo released a similar video for the same cause in Maryland.
Phoenix Suns players Jared Dudley and Grant Hill filmed public service announcements addressing homophobic language among teenagers that will be aired during the NBA conference finals.

So far, there have been no gay athletes in the four major professional sports, at least none that have come out yet. Though the NBA's Dennis Rodman announced at a point that he was bisexual. And let's not forget TNA Wrestling's Orlando Jordan.
And sexual orientation has always been something of a taboo subject in the sports world.

Usually, I think athletes should stay out of politics' way, and focus on their sport and communities. However, I think an exception can be made if the agenda at hand is one of correcting a civil injustice. In this case, promoting equal rights to LGBT couples wishing to marry.

With the help of Avery and his fellow athletes also in support of the fight for equal rights, we can only hope that eventually, homophobia in the locker rooms can be a thing of the past.

Thank you, Sean Avery.

(Note: information from ESPN New York was used in this blog)

Why the Blues Have Sucked, and a Trade Won't Help

2010-11-18T17:03:00.003-06:00

Brace yourselves, citizens. It's been a while since I've written one of these, and I have some things I just want to get off my Ruskie-Polack chest!

It's no secret that the Blues have been doing terrible. 29 allowed goals in our last 5 games. Halak looks lost. Defence is no help. Some of our best forwards and defencemen are shelved.

What do we do? It depends on who you ask. Some say, trade somebody! Trade Brewer, trade Boyes, trade Mac, trade Halak, anyone!

I say, trade nobody. Like trading a vital piece of our puzzle for a short-term bandaid will help us.

Where shall I begin... how about Mr. Halak? Our savior! But look at him now. He looks lost out there. Never mind the fact that defence isn't doing much to take off some of the pressure around him. He's been performing pretty awful out there, hasn't he?

I hate to break it to you, but it had to come eventually. He has been doing phenomenal until our losing streak. He played in all but one game in our 7-game string of wins.

Every goalie goes through a rough patch. You can't expect them to stand on their heads night in and night out. Just like how you can't expect a forward to score every game. Goalies go through slumps just like skaters. It happens. And besides, it's not like he's alone. Conklin gave up 5 goals in Phoenix, if I remember correctly.
Halak is going to struggle. Every goalie does. He can't carry this team on his back.

It doesn't help matters that defence hasn't been doing a whimsical job of toning down some of the pressure on him. Shouldn't some of the blame should fall on defence? Keep in mind, some of our top players here are out. But the fill-ins have been doing okay. Even in the absense of Polak and Jackman, to an extent, we've been doing okay with what we have.

Brewer has been proving what I've been saying since the offseason. He's doing much better, he's doing his job. He may make some mistakes, but they are fewer. And he's shown he isn't afraid to block shots. He's high-ranking on the team in blocked shots, mind you.Oh, he also has the 2nd best +/- rating of all our defencemen.
He's been doing well at winning battles in the corners, in addition to blocking shots. He doesn't need to produce points to be a good defenceman. Just look at Mike Weaver. Now there was a good d-man.

And don't take his career -103 rating into consideration. It wasn't often that he was a part of a contending team.
Mind you, his Blues teammates voted him as captain. So he has influence there. Trading him wouldn't exactly help us there.
Lidstrom made three mistakes that I saw on wednesday. Should he be traded too? Oh, by the way, Brewer made very few mistakes, if any.

Erik Johnson, meanwhile, has been falling in the corner and holding the puck for too long.

But I won't hold individuals accountable. Some are doing better than others, and some are doing worse. But the entire defence as a whole has been allowing too much pressure on Halak and Conklin. Is any one player to blame for that?

Okay, let's shift gears to offence.

First off, Oshie and Perron are out. TJ is a guy who leads by example on the ice. Perron could spit in your direction and some of that talent might, just might, be bestowed upon whichever lucky soul happens to be within a metre of that magic loogey.

Keep in mind, we do have 12 goals in our last 5 games. Yeah that's not much, but it's better than nothing. McDonald, Steen, Backes, and D'Agostini have been doing their part.

Some disagree about the deal we made with Backes. Well, I DO agree. Backes may not be scoring much, but should we just expect him to put 30+ goals up, willy-nilly? I don't. How can you just overlook his overall game? Backes is a player who doesn't need to score goals to be a positive contribution. If you look at him when he doesn't have the puck, you'll see what I mean. There is more to him than just his scoring stats.

Going the more general route, the Blues have a tonne of injuries, in the toughest stretch of games the Blues will have all season. Take that into consideration. We were going to lose some games anyway. But with our best forwards and defencemen out, it's a lot of injuries to deal with at one time. If it was just one or two guys, maybe. But this is a lot. Not many teams would be able to cope with this much at one time.

I'm as upset about this losing streak as much as the next fan. But we can't keep going to red alert and calling for a trade every time we hit a bad slump like this.

We can win with the team we have, as we proved by winning 7 games. BUT, put a bunch of the best players on IR, and things might not go the way we'd like.

Want the team to improve? This is what must be done:
1. Better positioning by our goaltenders
2. Better puck support
3. Better positioning in the defensive zone
4. Just play smarter as well
5. Stay out of the penalty box
6. Win the puck battles we were winning before the columbus game
7. Be Mentally strong

I think the team got too hyped up after the start, and were too pressured by all the media attention they were receiving.

The goals will come. Better defence will come. When we get our starters back from the IR, you'll see. But until then, just take a deep breath and enjoy Blues hockey.

NHL Rule Changes: Awful Idea

2010-08-24T16:13:00.005-05:00

I've been a hockey fan for a long time. Yeah, I'm just a lowly Amerikan, but since I was a kid, hockey always interested me, and that interest grew as I got older. I watched more games, studied the stats, learned about the history, I wanted to know everything there was to know about the sport of hockey. I'd like to think I've come to know the sport quite well over the last decade. Am I knowledgeable? Do I really know the game as well as I think? Maybe, maybe not.

As much as I've learned, I always found it a little irritating to find out when the NHL makes a rule change. It's not something I'm used to, but I usually just suck it up and accept it. Even the ridiculous rules, like the goalie's trapezoid, or the over-the-glass delay-of-game penalty. I really hate those.

But now, I've been reading over the last several days that the NHL is tinkering with several more changes. The majority of them just sound like they were high when they thought of them. Alow me to break down the rule changes being considered:

1: Having three faceoff circles, one in each zone, down the centre of the rink:
- Are you serious? How long has the NHL, or any hockey league for that matter, had the usual complement of faceoff circles that have been around for over a century? When did this become a nusiance? I really hope the league has a good excuse for proposing this. Like they were high.

B: The whistle starts play in place of a puck drop:
- Again, are you out of your mind? That's like having players scramble for a basketball, XFL-style in place of a tip-off. Another part of hockey that has worked fine since organized hockey has been around, and that I can't possibly fathom leaving the game.

3: If a player has been deemed to commit a faceoff infraction, he would be required to move back and keep his skates behind a "penalty line" (one foot) to take the faceoff:
- This is getting outlandishly ridiculous already...

4: No-touch icing, in which a referee can blow the whistle as soon as the puck crosses the line:
- I'd prefer if this stays how it is. But I guess I wouldn't complain too much if it took effect.

5: Having the second referee located off the playing surface:
- Huh?

6: Not allowing a team to change lines after committing offsides:
- Ah, finally a rule change that does NOT sound like it was conceived in a drunken state.

7: Three minutes of 4-on-4 overtime, three minutes of 3-on-3, then 2-on-2:
- No way. No bleeping way. I've said it before, and I'm saying it again: overtime is FINE the way it is! Five minutes of overtime then a shootout is not that horrible. Some fans may hate the shootout, but I like it myself.
Shootout debates aside, this is suppsoed to be the National Hockey League. Professional hockey. Not arcade-style hockey, the likes of which you can find on PlayStation 1 arcade hockey games. Rock The Rink, this ain't. Hitz, nope. NHL hockey. There is no logic in continually removing players as overtime drags on. Hate on the shootouts if you will, but I don't understand how anyone canagree with this proposed overtime garbage.

8: Narrowing the shallowness of the net, allowing players more room behind it:
- Just another stupid proposal to increase scoring. Haven't there been enough rule changes in efforts to increase scoring? Several decades ago, a rule was changed (I don't remember which) to increase scoring. Years later, it was changed back to the way it was... in an effort to increase scoring. Why do we need so many rules to increase scoring? Hockey isn't always boring just becasue there aren't always many goals scored.

9: Increase the size of the crease in all directions by three inches.
- I don't get it. I really don't.

Most rule changes, depsite their retardedness, I was able to get over. But these new rule changes being considered, I have to ask why? Why make these ridiculous changes to a game that's fine and fun to watch as it is?
I hope none of these changes take place. Most of them would change the game significantly, and just make it not as fun as it has been. I enjoy hockey because it's fun to watch, it's action-packed, and it's just a joy. It doesn't need to be tainted just because the powers that be aren't happy with the number of goals scored during games. Safety reasons, I can understand. But don't change key parts of it and justify it by saying it'll produce more goals.

WNBA in St. Louis: Why It's A Good Fit

2010-07-10T23:20:00.005-05:00

A few weeks ago, my computer was out of commission. I had to resort to other things to occupy (and waste) my time. I was channel-surfing, and I stumbled across ESPN Classic. Up until this point, the only interesting thing I ever saw from this channel was a mini-documentary about how Wayne Gretzky's presence significantly influenced hockey interest in California, and all across the American south.

The second program I ever watched on ESPN Classic was a game I haven't watched since I was a boy. 1995. Chicago Bulls at the Dallas Mavericks. Michael Jordan vs Jason Kidd. But mostly, in my case, Michael Jordan, the man I idolized as a child. I loved MJ, I loved the Bulls, I just loved basketball period. Watching this game seriously brought back memories for me. I've had my nostalgic moments, but this one was one of the biggest. Watching the old Bulls crew again, Jordan, Pippen, Rodman, Harper, Kukoc, and the rest, doing their thing. The only thing missing was the epic introductions that got me fired up before every home game.

I followed the Chicago Bulls as closely as a 6-year-old kid could, back in the day. I watched every piece of Bulls basketball I could. I had Jordan and Pippen jerseys. I watched Space Jam, a lot. I even followed the WNBA for a short time (which I continued just last year, but I'll get back to that). Basically my life was basketball.
Them Mr. Jordan left. The game was never the same. Basketball started getting phased out of my life, making way for other sports, like hockey, football, baseball, boxing, the Olympics. You know, sports I could follow more effectively since St. Louis had those teams. I became a fan of the Cardinals, Rams, and most of all, the Blues. Basketball, for the most part, no longer took up a part of my Ruskie-Polack heart.

Just before the 2009 WNBA season, I came across an article in Sports Illustrated, about then-ex-WNBA'er Chamique Holdsclaw. It mentioned she retired because of severe depression. I can relate, I've been known to get depressed a lot myself. She was making a return that year, so I decided to follow her and show some support. Next thing you know, I'm a fan of the WNBA, Atlanta Dream, Chamique Holdsclaw, and women's basketball. It's very underrated, and deserves way more respect and recogniton it gets now.

So after a little over a year of following and supporting WNBA and Atlanta Dream basketball, it hit me like a slippery fish: this is exactly what the city of St. Louis could use.

A WNBA franchise in St. Louis would mean the revival of professional basketball in the city. 1976 was the last time a pro game was played here, as the ABA's Spirits of St. Louis exited the 75-76 season without a playoff berth, and made plans to pack their bags to play in Salt Lake City, Utah.
There was also the NBA's St. louis Bombers, established in 1946, and folding in 1950.

I realize I just referenced two professional men's franchises in what's supposed to be about women's basketball. Well, the WNBA is professional too.
Attendance for the Bombers and Spirits weren't very impressive, but times have changed. The Scottrade Center holds 19,150 people, and could benefit from additional operation time during the WNBA season. Given the WNBA's attendance figures, not every seat would be likely to be filled. But basketball isn't exactly a forgotten gem in this city. The Mizzou and SLU basketball programs have their followers. And in high school, basketball is just a step below football in popularity. Missouri's poll numbers on ESPN.com are actually higher than some stated with NBA/WNBA franchises, such as Louisiana. A franchise in the Gateway city surely wouldn't be ignored.

The NBA doesn't appear ready to expand anytime soon, and if they were, I'm sure St. Louis wouldn't be very prominent on their radar, but I could be wrong. I am a lot. However, the WNBA might be a little friendlier.

Donna Orender, the next time a team is relocated, or you expand, St. Louis should be high-ranking on your list of possible markets. The Scottrade Center doesn't get much use during WNBA season, and it'd be much less of an issue than with the NBA, since their season clashes with the NHL frequently. The WNBA in St. Louis would indeed be a perfect fit.

I will shortly crate another blog, tracking basketball in St. Louis, including any opportunities that could arise for a professional basketball franchise to come to St. Louis.

What if Tom got tired of all the lousy History-will-be-made" commercials? History will be made.

2010-05-07T17:34:00.005-05:00

Johan Franzen scores a mediocre goal against Evgeny Nabokov. Miroslav Satan scores on a breakaway. Marc-Andre Fleury makes a save he's made countless times. Kris Versteeg scores a game-winning goal. Mike Cammalleri bats the puck past Fleury. Little Joe comes up big.

All these semi-awesome moments happening in the NHL Playoffs, it's only right that the NHL take a really cool commercial concept and completely destroy it by churning out a new one every time something questionably cool happens in the playoffs, right? They finally do something I like, and just ruin it by overdoing it.

The History commercials were awesome because not only did they feature some of the greatest players to ever lace a pair of skates, but it made me think: what if there were no Greatness? What if Mario was not so Super? What if Patrick Roy really did play like a rookie? What if Bobby did not fly? The Blues could have had another chance to win the 'Cup, that's what!

But personal team-related feelings aside, the NHL really screwed up here. I know it's probably no big deal, but I'm just getting tired of seeing these new commercials. I realize there are more important things we should be worrying about. Like incompetent referees.
Maybe that should be their next commercial: "what if referees didn't take bets before games on who could botch the game the most? History will be made."
Now THAT would be a commercial worth watching!
But in all seriousness, the NHL really needs to stop making these commercials like it's a bodily function. It was cool at first, but I don't want to see another one just because Antti Niemi made a nice save.

Fighting with wrist tape

2009-12-31T22:17:00.004-06:00

"Any player or goalkeeper wearing tape or any other material on his hands (below the wrist) who cuts or injures an opponent during an altercation will receive a match penalty in addition to any other penalties imposed including for fighting under this rule."

Does that or does it not make sense? What if you cut your opponent and you have nothing on your hand? No match penalty. But if you have tape below your wrist, then you get it? I would think that if you have anything above the wrist taped, and you cut the other guy, that would call for a match penalty.

In tonight's Blues-Canucks game, Rick Rypien had his wrist/thumb taped because acording to the announcers, he was nursing a minor thumb sprain. He bloodied Cam Janssen in their fight tonight. And he got a match penalty because of his tape. Except for his thumb, which I highly doubt would contribute to cutting your opponent.

Can someone explain to me why wrist tape (or in Rypien's case, thumb tape) is so dangerous in a fight that the NHL had to make a rule for it?

Mehlville HS hockey vs Blues hockey

2009-12-19T22:56:00.003-06:00

I find myself in a difficult position, regarding the schedule of the Mehlville High School hockey club.

Up until my senior year, I had no idea any school in the South STL County area even had a hockey program. A portion of Mehlville's halls are lined with trophy cases, crammed with trophies, ribbons, photos, plaques, and other objects to symbolize the accomplishments of our football/baseball/basketball/track/volleyball/swim teams. One floor below, is a smaller case tucked away in a corner that nobody can see, collecting dust for as long as it's been there. This would be the case belonging to the hockey club. That's how much we care about hockey here. As much as I liked it at MHS, the hockey nut in me was brokenhearted that it took me this long to realize we have a team.

Recently, I decided to take action and get our schedule down, and hope to attend some games. Thankfully, much of the games take place at the Kennedy Recreation Complex, very close to where I live. I was happy I'd get to see my old Panthers club play hockey, it would make me feel like I was back in school, cheering the football team on to victory. This was gonna rule!

Unfortunately, there is a situation that I have no control of whatsoever.

The powers that be have scheduled a large portion of Mehlville's games at the same time as (or close enough to) Blues games, the NHL team I follow and love with all my Ruskie-Polack heart. After tonight, there are no more Mehlville HC games until January, the final month of HS hockey. In that month, there are only two games that are not scheduled during Blues games. One on the 7th, the other on the 21st. Out of 9 games that month (five at Kennedy Rec.), there are only two I can attend without worrying about missing any Blues action.
As much as I'd like to attend those 5 games anyway, I don't want to miss any Blues action either. Simply put, I don't know what to do. If there weren't so many MHS games at the same time as Blues games, this wouldn't be as big of a problem.

What to do, what to do... this is where you come in (I hope). I welcome any and all suggestions on what I should do. Be sure to explain why I should do what you suggest. Thanks in advance!

Jersey From The Future, Courtesy Of The NHL

2009-11-04T23:36:00.011-06:00

I just got a look at the NHL's new women's Ice Flirt jerseys. I really don't know what the NHL expects us to think about these, but I think the league decided to go with the "jersey from the future" deal.

Seriously, these look like the kind of jerseys Starfleet would use if they took up a hockey program. Every time I see these, I keep thinking of various Star Trek characters taking on teams from throughout the galaxy, wearing these monstrosities, only with the Federation logo on them. I can just imagine Worf finally getting the chance to take out his aggressions on Quark, by violently bodychecking him. Repeatedly. Or Jean-Luc Picard getting kicked out of a game because he kept instigating fights with various players from Team Borg. Rivalry games between Team Klingon and Team Romulan, or Team Borg vs Team Species 8472, Tellarites vs Andorians...

I could go on and on, but I don't want to disturb anyone further with my nerdiness.

Moving on... I hope I'm not offending any women out there who like these jerseys. I think it's an interesting concept on the NHL's part, they're not bad jerseys. Their futuristic flair really amused me at first glance.

They're Called "Defensemen" For A Reason

2009-10-10T14:38:00.004-05:00

A while back, NHL.com was running their "30 teams In 30 Days" feature, basically giving a season preview for all 30 teams. I was reading the Pittsburgh Penguins edition, when something caught my eye. They happened to mention the signing of defenceman Jay McKee. That made me upset because he used to be with the St. Louis Blues, my team. He was one of my favourite players all three years he was with us. And now he was gone, miles away, in a Pittsburgh Penguins sweater. As if that wasn't bad enough, while analyzing how well he'd do with his new team, they gave him a decent outlook, even though "he'll never win a Norris Trophy."

That really raised my blood pressure. As I was talking about it with my good friend Melina, she kindly pointed out Jay's poor point production may have something to do with it. It was the second time someone suggested his lack of scoring had to do with his release from St. Louis. While watching the news one day, the sports analyst also mentioned McKee's low point totals since joining the Gateway City. This confused me. Defencemen aren't supposed to be big-time goal scorers, they're supposed to stop the puck from entering their net. It's the forwards' jobs to score, not the defencemen's. Not that a d-man scoring is a bad thing. I have no problem with it, but it shouldn't be used to judge them. And barring offensive capabilities, there's no reason Jay McKee (or any other shot-blocking specialist) should be labeled as one who has no chance at even being nominated for a Norris Trophy. But I realized, that is probably exactly the reason McKee was released from St. Louis.

After doing some research, I confirmed it. Several Norris Trophy winners had high goal totals. For example, Bobby Orr. He was either 2nd or 3rd on his team in goals scored 4 out of his 8 years as a Norris winner. Paul Coffey is the highest-scoring Norris Trophy winner of all time, with 48 goals scored (not to mention a +61 rating) in 1986. Rob Blake scored 23 goals in his 1998 Norris year, despite a -3 rating, which is, in my opinion, one of the best ways to determine a defenceman's effectiveness on the ice. The lowest-scoring Norris winner was Rod Langway, notching 3 goals in 1983. The average for goals scored among Norris Trophy winners is 18, which is 6th in overall team scoring.

Jay McKee's +/- rating was a -2 in his first season as a Blue, which rose to +2, then +11 this past season. In my opinion, that's improvement. Goalscoring aside, McKee has accumulated acceptable +/- ratings throughout his NHL career, and he has done a tremendous job of keeping the puck out of the net. He is known throughout the league as one of the best shot blockers today. He may be injury-prone, but he is amazing at what he does. He wasn't named one of the Buffalo Sabres' alternate captains in 2006 for nothing. Despite all he has going for him, whoever wrote NHL.com's Penguins preview still feels he'll never win a Norris Trophy.

It's unfortunate that scoring plays a role in determining how good a defenceman is, not just his skills on defence. If Bobby Orr, Paul Coffey, Dennis Potvin, Al MacInnis, all had not scored as many goals as they had, would they still have won the Norris Trophy? If Drew Doughty would have scored more this past season, would he have had a better chance at winning the Calder Trophy? If Mike Green wouldn't have scored as many goals as he did in 2009, would he have been nominated? I tend to think not. What if Rod Langway would have scored as many goals as Doug Wilson before him? Would he have won more Norris Trophies? With the NHL's unneccessary yet growing (and perceived) dependency on offensively-minded d-men, I tend to believe so. People like Jay McKee and Drew Doughty are great players who are crucial to their teams. They don't score much, but there's no reason that should matter. While goals by a defenceman isn't neccessarily a abd thing (goals are goals, after all), but they should not be a defenceman's primary objective. Instead of judging them based on goalscoring, let's take their primary role more seriously and judge them for what they really are supposed to do: stop the other team from scoring.

Why The Offseason raises My Blood Pressure

2009-07-19T18:47:00.009-05:00

http://espn.go.com/sportsnation/post/_/id/4350334/blogging-nation

It's been a while since I've written one of these. Oh well, there are a few things concerning the state of the Blues that have made me, well, concerend. I've been getting increasingly worried about my boys in blue lately, and so far very little has happened to ease my mind.

First and foremost, Jay McKee is now a Pittsburgh Penguin. Just thinking about Jay in a 'Pens jersey raises my blood pressure. In the past several years, McKee has been among my favourite defencemen to watch. He is one of the best shot blockers this league has ever seen. There's a reason he was named alternate captain of the Buffalo Sabres during his last season with them. Sure he may be injury-prone (he's suffered a leg infection, knee injury, other various lower-body injuries, and almost had his finger taken off during a shot block), but when he's not injured, he does his job, and does it well. Ever since joining the Blues, his +/- rating has steadily improved, his biggest improvement coming this season, jumping from a +2 to a +11. So what if he was slightly overpaid, he's worth it. Unfortunately, the powers that be sure didn't think so. Bad move.

Since we're on the subject of defencemen, why have the Blues not re-signed Roman Polak yet? Our defence situation is rocky to say the least. Brewer might come back next season, but that's a pretty big "maybe." McKee is Pittsburgh-bound. Pietrangelo might... MIGHT... make the squad. Cole is staying in college for one more year. Peluso still has a ways to go. It's safest to keep Wagner in Peoria for at least one more season. Signing Polak would be a big step in securing our defence lineup. The front office needs to get on it and make the deal happen. Now. I know sometimes these things take a while, but seriously, stop beating around the bust and get this done.

At first, I didn't care whether we re-signed BJ "Breadcrumb" Crombeen or not. But now, I can't help but wonder why we did. We already have enough young, talented forwards to hang onto Breadcrumb any more. But now that he's a sealed deal, I think it would be best to send him to Peoria for now. That likely won't happen, but I really think it would be in the team's best interests.
The man, the myth, the Lagace... oops! Oh well, it won't be the first time someone mispelled his name. Like when he won the Stanley Cup in 2002, and his name was spelled "Lagace" on the 'Cup. At least he took the news better than Adam Deadmarch... I mean, Deadmarsh.Manny Legace has been a huge question mark since he got demoted to Peoria. When you have a goalie who has won Olympic silver, played in an AHL All-Star Game, won the Holmes Memorial Trophy and the Bastien Memorial Trophy (best AHL goalie and AHL goalie with the fewest goals against, respectively), played in an NHL All-Star Game, and won a Stanley Cup, and win over a city like St. Louis in the process, and his performance slips so badly he is demoted to the AHL, that can leave his future in the NHL uncertain. Despite injuries, he hasn't done a a bad job in St. Louis. That is, until the 09 season. I'm all for second chances, but I'm just not sure about Manny. With the exception of losing to Curtis Sanford twice, and having to be bailed out by Ben Bishop and Chris Holt, he did an okay job in Peoria. Although he couldn't get past the first round of the AHL playoffs, still, he had a 2.00 GAA (10th in the AHL playoffs) and a .935 save % (12th in the AHL playoffs). As much as I'd like to see him get a second chance, I'd also like Bishop to get more time in net, and resume development, with Holt backing him up, who did a great job of it this season. With Jean-Phillippe Lamoureux gone, perhaps signing Legace can leave more possibilities for filling the void in Alaska?

Why the hell did we let Trent Whitfield get away? He was everything the Rivermen could want in a veteran leader. So what if he never was NHL material? He was an invaluable piece of the system in Peoria. With so many talented up-and-comers, it was a no-brainer to keep Trent. He said himself he liked the way things were in Peoria, his family was comfortable there, and he trusted the coaching staff. There was nothing wrong with him or what he was doing. To say he did a tremendous job is an understatement.

I know some of the other teams have bigger issues than these, and this likely is the least of the Blues' worries, but I just don't understand the moves this organization has made recently. Signing Conklin and Tkachuk were some of the best moves made so far, but other than that, it's been quite questionable. I don't want to lose faith and confidence in this team all over again, but it's getting harder and harder not to. The Blues better start making better moves, I want to actually believe in my team when the season starts. And right now, the outlook for that isn't very bright. Here's hoping that can change by the time the Blues hit the ice in October.

Incredibly Late-Period Penalties

2009-05-19T01:29:00.010-05:00

Something has been on my mind for a while now, and I never really took the time to mention anything about it. Better late than never I guess. Anyway... A while back, something really irritated the hell out of me and I'm going to talk about it whether you like it or not.

May 10, 2009. I'm watching the Bruins and Hurricanes, who appeared to be getting increasingly hostile with each other as the game progressed, especially in the 3rd period. Hope for the Hurricanes to win the game was long gone at this point, I was just watching for kicks now. But late in the 3rd period, something happened. And by "late," I really mean late. There must have been 1-2 seconds left in the period, and subsequently, the entire game. A big hoo-ha breaks out, fists are flying everywhere, it's a slobberknocker on the ice, and to top it all off, Milan Lucic is sent off on a misconduct. As I'm sitting there, amused by the referees' temporary lack of ability to restrain the players, I realized, they stopped the clock. No biggie, right? Any other point in the game, it would indeed be no biggie. But this was the 3rd period, and there were 1-3 seconds left.
Simply put, I got to wait a few minutes until the puck dropped and the final 1-3 seconds were officially burned off the clock and Boston could tally up a win. I waited several minutes for a 1-3 second countdown.

This wasn't the first time my rage was aroused by a late-period penalty that forced a several minute-long waiting period before the final 3 seconds of a period or game could be officially counted down. It has happened before- not much, but it still happens nonetheless.

I don't know if this is normal, but I just don't understand why the clock has to be stopped to address a penalty... when there's 2 seconds left in the period. All it does is burn up time before the period inevitably ends. Maybe it's just me, but it would be much wiser (and time-saving) to wait until the period is over, and just carry over the penalty to the next period. Instead of starting the period on the powerplay for 1:59, why not make it the full 2 minutes? I know that may not seem like much of a difference. We'll all agree that it isn't. At all. But think about how much time it would save in the final seconds of the last period. Instead of burning up a minute or two for addressing the penalty, the clock isn't stopped, no time is wasted, and the penalty carries over to the next period in it's entirety. It may only save a minute or two, which isn't much, but it does spare the arousal of my anger, which would be flaring if the penalty had delayed the end of the period.

So that's my proposed solution to really, really, really, really late-period penalty calls.

But what if it's the 3rd period?

My proposal still stands. I just don't see a point in stopping the clock when there's 2 seconds left to send a player to the penalty box when they'll only spend 2 seconds there. I think it would make much more sense to just let the clock burn out and let the penalty go. It just wouldn't be worth it to keep him in the box and let play resume if it will last only 2 seconds. And it would save me plenty of unneccessary rage.

It's Go Time

2009-04-15T02:34:00.008-05:00

I was the total skeptic. I saw the raw, unbelieveable talent the St. Louis Blues had, I understood just what kind of impact players like TJ "Smash Brother" Oshie, Patrik "Bergalicious" Berglund, David Perron, Chris Mason, would have on this squad. I never would have guesed Chris Mason would dominate in net as much as he has, or that David Backes, netting only 13 goals last season, would breach the 30+ mark this time around. And as far as STL's worship of TJ Oshie goes, I knew he would be big, but not like he is. I knew the Blues had plenty of power under the hood, but as far as reaching the playoffs? I was a non-believer, if you will.

After losing Manny Legace to the Peoria Rivermen, captain Eric Brewer and superstar Paul Kariya to injury, and Erik Johnson to a freak golf cart accident, among others, leaving the Blues with only 5 players not missing time due to injury, shot-block grandmaster Jay McKee came close to losing his finger, Legace missed a good chunk of playing time thanks to a kick to the head, groin injuries, and Sarah Palin's carpet. Nikolay Lemtyugov and Marek Schwarz left for their home countries, knowing they're major prospects for the Blues (for the most part anyway). Fan-favourite Lee Stempniak was traded to Toronto. This really hurt me. It was bad enough hearing that one of the best the Blues had to offer was no longer going to be with us, but when I recieved the news, I was- no joke- in the hospital, just about the worst place I could be in to hear such news. Up until last week, I had maintained the same feelings of doubt that St. Louis would see the post-season.

Don't get me wrong, it's not like I didn't support my boys in blue. You ask me where I was during any given game, I'll tell you that my ass was in front of my TV, or in the seats of the Scottrade Center, sacrificing my voice just to show some love to the Soldiers. Because no matter what, you pretty much have to do what you can to, as David Puddy put it, "support the team." If you're a true fan, it's what you do. And it's definitely what I did. Despite all this support and still not believing in the team, some people questioned my loyalty, one even went so far as to question my hockey sense. But it didn't bother me, it was how I truly felt, until last week. Yes, it's true, while everyone around me was increasingly confident in our playoff chances, here I was, still gearing up for a Blues-less post-season. It took the almost last game of the season to convince me that we would indeed taste post-season hockey. Because that particular game was what would launch us into the post-season. I waited until the last possible minute to jump on the playoff bandwagon. Not that I regret it, I just wish I would have believed a little earlier. But that's just the way I am, I'm not the most confident person in the world when it comes to this kind of stuff. I'm hopeful, but confidence is another thing.

This whole time, I was a non-believer. I was a skeptic, a naysayer, or whatever. But all that has changed over the past few days. The Blues now have a chance to bring Lord Stanley's Mug to the Gateway City. The Blues faithful won't have to watch another playoffs without the Blues this time around, and I couldn't be happier. It's been increasingly hard to stay in a good mood lately, but earning a playoff run has made things a little easier.

It's our time. Our time to show why we made it this far, why we deserve to compete for the most coveted prize in all hockey. This season wasn't a fluke. It felt like it wasn't supposed to be a success at times, but even with all our injuries, even without our team captain, we made it. I was a non-believer up until last week, it took this long to finally realize, after how far we came, just how much this team is capable of. So if there any more non-believers out there, stand aside in fear. Everyone else, buckle up and hold on, Lord Stanley awaits. In the words of Izzy Mandelbaum, it's go time.

Holt's Days In STL Are Done... Now What?

2009-03-14T03:24:00.004-05:00

News that one of the most significant players on your favorite NFL team has been released is some of the worst news a fan can possibly hear. Like last season when the Rams released Issac Bruce. That was pretty hard to swallow, and so is hearing that Torry Holt's 10-year tenure with the Rams is over, having been released.

How could this be, one of St. Louis' most beloved sports figures is no longer going to be seen in the blue and gold. Some believe making such a move is unthinkable, an unwise, foolish move. After all, he's done so much for the Rams and the city of St. Louis. In his rookie year, he was an integral part of the Rams' appearance in the 1999 Super Bowl, their first Super Bowl victory in decades. Let's not forget that Holt scored a touchdown that night. He may not have done as much as mega-star Issac Bruce that year, but second best is still good enough, having accummulated 52 receptions, 788 yards, and 6 touchdowns for the season, no doubt a big contribution to the team's lead over the entire rest of the league in passing touchdowns and total yards. He was the Rams' rookie of the year that season, as well he should have been.
Ever since that season, he has accummulated at least 1,000 yards until 2005, since injuries prevented him from doing the same in 2006. But no matter, he's still the only reciever in NFL history to accummulate 1,300 yards for 6 uninterrupted seasons. He has made 7 Pro Bowl appearances, in one of which he was a starter, and he is among the top 10 receivers in receiving yards and touchdowns. In 2000 and 2003, he led the league in receiving yards, and for receptions also in 2003. Also worth noting is that Holt holds the NFL record for consecutive 90+ receptions, 6 consecutive seasons to be exact.

Holt accomplished all of this while in a Rams uniform. His legacy as a St. Louis Ram is basically sealed.

As if that wasn't enough, after the 1999 season, he, along with brother and fellow NFL'er Terrence, began The Holt Foundation (in memory of their mother), supporting the fight against cancer. Also he is a spokesperson for the Diversity Awareness Partnership in St. Louis.
A player like Torry Holt will be hard to replace, if he can be at all. The future Hall-Of-Famer's now empty slot is waiting to be filled, possibly by the next big wide receiver for the Rams. If the Rams can get their hands on Michael Crabtree at the Draft, most fans wouldn't argue such a move. After all, he's considered a top prospect, especially at his position. With the possible exception of free agency, this is seen by many as the best way to make up for the loss of Torry Holt. Since the Rams will have the #2 draft pick, they better choose wisely. And choosing Crabtree would definitely be a wise move. I have heard nothing but good things from this young future star, and I believe he would be among the best ways to ease the pain of losing Holt.

Of course it won't ease the pain completely. This is a hurtful loss for the Rams. They are losing a significant piece of history, the likes of which may never be seen again by the Rams. The best thing we can do is wish Holt well, and hope that somehow, whether by way of the draft, free agency, or trades (primarily the draft), the Rams can make up for this loss. Longtime fans will be sour about this for years to come, including myself, especially considering future hall-of-fame tackle Orlando Pace was released also earlier in the week. Truly these are difficult losses to swallow. But in times like this, it's best not to dwell on the past, but to look to the future. Everything changes, but nothing really goes away, including strength at the wide receiver position. Sure there may never be another player like Holt, but we can still make the most of what we have now, or what we will have later on down the road.

Torry Holt will never be forgotten, and will forever be remembered by fans for years to come.

A Calder Cup In Peoria?

2009-03-09T21:30:00.001-05:00

The Rivermen's last win (vs Chicago, 3-2) was Peoria's 4th straight win. That's their longest win streak all season long. On friday, the Rivermen will trek to Grand Rapids and try to make it a 5-game win streak when they face the Griffins.
The 'Men are within one point of a last-seed playoff spot. If they keep up the good work, they can try to overtake Chicago for a playoff spot. It won't be easy, the AHL's Western Conference, much like the NHL's own, has been quite competitive all season long. At the start of the season, Peoria had been hovering around the middle of the standings, both in the West Division and Western Conference. After the All-Star Classic, they started to lose ground, but they could be well on their way back up.

Let's take a look back, shall we?

3/8/09
PEO 3, CHI 2
- The latest in Peoria's 4-game streak. Chicago had the fans at the Allstate Arena smelling victory after scoring 2 quick, back-to-back goals in the 1st, but it was nothing the 'Men couldn't overcome. Manny Legace made 30 out of 32 saves, including 13 in the 3rd period, one of which was a pont-blank on the powerplay. This was merely minutes before Nicholas Drazenovic scored the game-winning goal. Also worth noting is Ivan "Vish Out Of Water" Vishnevskiy has scored 3 points in the last 4 games, this time tying the game in the 2nd period.

3/7/09
PEO 4, RFD 3
- If you're against the shootout, this wasn't a game I advise you look back on. Even though the Rivermen did win it, scoring on all 3 chances in the SO.
This was a close game from the opening faceoff. Goal after goal after goal after goal up until the end of the 3rd period. A nail-biter of an OT if there ever was one, the shootout-haters were quite unpleased. But even the most die-hard skeptics must have been pleased with peoria's effort, forcing 3 allowed goals out of AHL superstar goalie Corey Crawford. He isn't an easy goalie to beat by any means, but beat him the Rivermen did. More specifically, Nicholas Drazenovic, Carl Corazzini and alternate captain Steve Regier.

3/6/09
PEO 4, CHI 2
- All it took was a little over a minute for Julian Talbot to score to take the lead, which the 'Men never let go of. Chicago's Andrej Pavelec made some quite impressive saves this game, but it wasn't enough, simple as that. Not tonight. Especially that 2nd period one-timer started by Carl Corazzini, which led to a very beautiful goal by Ryan Reaves.
This game evened the series between the two teams at 4-4-0, at least until a few days later.
It's worth noting that during the 1st intermission, the Rivermen Hall Of Fame was introduced to two new inductees, Joe Rybar and Don Granato, the latter of which coached the 'Men to a Kelly Cup in 2000 during their ECHL days.

3/2/09
PEO 5, QC 2
- The game that started the streak. The powerplay was at it's best tonight, with 3 PP goals being scored tonight. The Rivermen's save of the year was tonight, as Manny Legace caught a David Van der Gulik slapshot between his head and shoulder in the 1st period. Unfortunately, he was injured in the 2nd. But thankfully, his backup, Chris Holt, was able to hold down the fort, making 12 out of 13 saves. This game made the R-Men's record against the Flames 7-1-0.

So can the Rivermen keep up the good work and achieve a playoff spot? If so, can they hold onto it until the playoffs begin in April? And if they can, will they be good enough in the battles to possibly come against the best teams in the Western Conference in a bid to bring a Calder Cup to Peoria?

I am not one for optimism, and maybe this is just wishful thinking, but the Rivermen have been playing greatly this month, and they're seemingly showing no signs of stopping. They're scoring, making the most of powerplay time, and Manny Legace is doing everything an AHL goalie should, not to mention having a great backup in Chris Holt. Whether it's good enough to make a post-season run is questionable, but it's not looking as bleak as it was. And it was looking really, really bleak.
It can be done, but the Rivermen will really have to work harder than ever and pull a few rabbits out of their hats, because the division and the rest of the conference is going to be working just as hard.

Ice Hockey In The South

2009-02-17T18:36:00.005-06:00

I'm tired of the banter, the one-sided debate, I want this settled once and for all.

Ice hockey in the south.

Now I know that there are some people here that will be ready to start a war as soon as their eyes see those words above. Before the condemners start going off here, I just want to say, this is not intended to cast you aside and totally ignore what you have to say. Your opinions are acknowledged. Okay? Cool.
Anyway.... I understand this can be a touchy subject. So many opinions supporting either side of this debate, it can get quite disorientating. I don't want that here. So what I'm going to do is acknowledge both sides of the argument before I say what I want to say, to be fair.

Hockey in the south be damned! Sound familiar? If you oppose hockey in places like Anaheim, Glendale, Dallas, Atlanta, Sunrise, Tampa, or simply any location in the southern portion of the US, then it should ring a bell.
You sure present quite compelling arguments. Of course warm-weather areas aren't exactly the first thing that enters one's mind when one thinks of ice hockey. 35 years ago, if you would have told a Winnipeg Jets fan that his/her beloved team would be relocated someday, they probably wouldn't believe you. If you told them the relocation would be to Arizona, they'd likely consider you insane. And who can blame them, it's what a lot of people thought when the Atlanta Flames entered the league. Sure they failed and were moved to Calgary, why wouldn't they be?They were placed in a bad market area, unfit for hockey. No suprise they never made it all that far in the playoffs, right?
Speaking of Arizona, as mentioned earlier, the Coyotes' financial situation is just killer, isn't it? Being in such a financial slump is bad enough, but such a team in a place like Glendale only muddies the waters, right? After all, it's definitely not a hockey market. Nontraditional, if you will. And when you consider the shape of the economy, well, we all know what's up there. And apparently so do those Canadian journalists who want nothing more than for the Coyotes to move up north again. And who can blame them? They lost their beloved Jets in the American desert. That's not the best way to make a Canadian fan happy. Or any fan at all. Unless you just happen to live in that particular desert, and you just HAPPEN to like ice hockey. In which case, that's exactly how to please a fan. But you're not a fan in the south, are you? Never mind the fact that the Southeast Division has churned out only 2 Stanley Cup champions in recent years, and 3 in the Pacific. Nothing to "ooh" and "aah" at. Unless the team is being moved, in which case, "ooh" and "aah" at will.
Perhaps the economy doesn't have to be all bad. It means Phoenix's issues are only made worse, thus strengthening the possibility of having them relocated, which is just what you want.
Phoenix and Nashville have their financial problems, the Atlanta Thrashers have never been too impressive in their time in the playoffs, the Panthers haven't made the playoffs since 2001. And they're all somewhere in the south. Coincidence? If you're not one for putting a hockey team in the deep south, maybe.

Long live southern hockey! This should be the battle cry for the thousands and thousands of fans who flock the BankAtlantic Center or the Jobing.com Arena to see their beloved ice-bound warriors give them a good show. After all, hockey is for everyone, right? No matter where you live? But of course.
Diversity is a truly great quality that should apply to everything. And ice hockey definitely falls under that category. After all, when the Lightning won the Cup in 2004, how many people do you think they proved wrong that hockey in a place like Florida could work out? In a place where college football reigns supreme, having a Stanley Cup from that area had to feel good, right? And ask any longtime Panthers fan if they were there when the Panthers made the Stanley Cup finals in 1996. Sure, they were swept. But they made it that far. Florida, of all teams! Of all places to base an ice hockey team in. Of course it's been over a decade since Florida saw the Cup finals. But they know their time is coming.
But back to the "diversity" thing. If you want more proof that diversity in hockey works, look outside the US and Canada. Look at other nations. Look at Australia. They have their own league and are a part of the IIHF, right? Just like Israel, the first Middle Eastern nation to be in the IIHF. Ice hockey in Israel has come a long way, but it's still running strong. Their men's squad was almost in the top division a few times. And the World Jewish Ice Hockey Tournament is coming up, to be held in Metula, Israel.

Ice hockey has existed in the south for a while now, long enough for a strong fan base to develop down there. What about the folks who spend more time at the Philips Arena or American Airlines Arena than they do anywhere else? What would they do if their favorite team was relocated? While attendance may be down in most southern arenas, there's still a decent enough showing. Fans who are just like any other. What makes a Coyotes fan any different from a Leafs fan? A Stars fan from a Rangers fan? A Thrashers fan from a RedWings fan? Absolutely nothing. So before you start fantasizing about the Coyotes moving back to Manitoba, think about those loyal desert-based fans who love their team as much as you love yours.
I grew up believing in diversity of all kinds, including locational diversity. When I first became a hockey fan, and I saw that there were places like Phoenix, Tampa, Sunrise, these hot-weather cities with ice hockey teams, I didn't think anything of it, it didn't seem unnatural because I really just liked hockey. I thought it was a pretty cool concept. It's different, and it gives the NHL (and hockey as a whole) more of a fan base, and thus more recognition. Ice hockey is a truly great sport. And sports have the power to unite people, and bring people together. Hockey should be no exception. To make it work, it should be played in places we least expect it to be played. The 3 other major sports leagues (MLB, NBA, NFL) have their teams spread throughout the country. The NHL might as well do the same. And of course they do. And in my opinion, it is a good move.