The Battle of Alberta

A reading from the Book of Kevin

2009-11-23T16:29:00.006-07:00

In light of this post by Tyler, and Kevin Smith's visit to Rexall this evening, an excerpt from Champions: The Making of The Edmonton Oilers by Kevin Lowe with Stan and Shirley Fischler.

"The evidence of our youthfulness was everywhere but nowhere more than in the dressing room where the music blared as if it were coming from a disco.

The orchestrators, essentially, were Messier, Lowe and Coffee although many others--Ken Linseman in particular for a short but significant period--produced tapes. A song called 'Jeopardy' was a big hit for some time....

...Certain guys--Glennie, Mess, Wayne, myself, Paul and Semenk--would get outwardly excited about the music. We'd put on 'Jeopardy', which has a real nice beat to it, and all of a sudden everyone would be clapping to the music. It was spontaneous. Guys would be standing around, taping their sticks, adjusting their equipment, doing routine stuff when the music would get going and everyone would start to clap.

Even the guys who one wouldn't figure would get so involved because they were the older guard actually were moved by the music. Fogie, for one, liked rock n' roll although he doesn't look like rock n' roller. It really got him fired up and Randy, the doctor, who some thought was out of place on the team, was the same way."

I particularly like how Lowe refers to himself in both the third and first person on the same page. Andy likes it so much, he has a couple of accompanying videos for everyone.

GOILERS.

Trade Phaneuf

2009-11-20T10:34:00.000-07:00

I'm not actually down on Dion Phaneuf. He can do things that few other players can do, and by my eye he makes incremental progress in his all-around game and decision-making.

Occasionally I have this dream where he gets dumped by his girlfriend, and is so goddamned mad and frustrated that he goes on an absolute tear: the kind where he becomes the player Pierre McGuire always thought he'd be, and possibly becomes hated by other NW fans for real sins, rather than imagined or trivial ones. But whatever. He's frustrating sometimes, but it's not often that I slap my forehead and say I can't believe we're paying this guy six-point-five mil a year until 2014.

But the facts are facts, and here are the two important ones:

ONE. The Flames need another difference maker at forward. And not just this season, but going forward as well, so it needs to be someone in his prime or just about.

TWO. Phaneuf's role, his wage, and the team's needs no longer align. Here's something I wrote in July 2008 that gets at my point:

I have written before that, while there is no magic formula when it comes to signing free agents, there are pitfalls to be avoided. They include [...] paying for offense from more than one defenseman, which is why I'm pretty skeptical about the Brian Campbell signing by the Hawks. On the one hand, their PP was pretty lousy last year (24th), and they don't presently have a clear #1 point man who can shoot, distribute, etc., so maybe he was a smart acquisition, in the same manner as he was an excellent acquisition by the Sharks last season. On the other hand, Seabrook and/or Barker are supposed to be growing into that role, and they already have a "do-it-all" d-man in Keith. The Campbell contract only makes sense if he provides a huge marginal advantage over the alternatives, and I'm not at all sure that he does. (And this is setting aside the too-long term, and the fact that he looked very ordinary in the playoffs.)

By definition, you can only have one #1 defenseman. You can only have one featured shooting threat on the PP. Most importantly, you can't pay elite wages for depth.

I think the backup G position is important. You want that guy to be solid when your #1 needs a break, and if there's an injury, well, god help you if you're unprepared. But that doesn't mean you go out and sign the best available goalie next July to be your backup, because on balance, you can't afford to devote those resources to that position.

To a lesser extent, this is the situation in Calgary on D. When Darryl Sutter signed Jay Bouwmeester on June 30 to a five-year, $33.4M deal with a NTC, he made the decision that JB would be heading up the blueline for the next 5 years. He can't afford to pay Dion Phaneuf to play the "Jay Bouwmeester" role, because he now has Jay Bouwmeester filling that role.

(Yes, yes, Pronger and Niedermayer won a Cup together... I believe those Ducks also proved that being the toughest, fightingest, penalty-takingest team was the winning formula, which is why the Maple Leafs are leading the Eastern Conference and are prohibitive favourites to win the Stanley.)

I think Darryl Sutter needs to shop Phaneuf for an elite young forward. There might be a few good reasons, but the important one is, It's what's best for the team.

Looks great in jeans, though

2009-11-19T15:09:00.000-07:00

Olli Jokinen went the final 13 games of the 08/09 regular season without scoring a goal. He scored twice in the 6-game playoff series against Chicago. And in the first 19 games of this season, he has scored two goals: one was shot from the corner that deflected off Kyle Cumiskey, and one was a dribbler that even Antti Niemi would agree was one of the five worst goals in the league this season. Count 'em up: that's 4 goals in the past 38 games.

He's recording 2.3 shots per game; he averaged 4.2 in his three post-lockout seasons. You notice different things in different games, but on Tuesday against Colorado, his unwillingness to shoot the puck was glaring; he didn't pass up prime scoring chances, but he certainly passed up some open lanes to the net.

Robert Cleave made a good point the other day that, like it or lump it, Jokinen is here for the duration. And I wasn't going to keep banging the Olli Sucks drum, but, this annoyed me:

"I think I have seven or eight times I hit the post so far this year, if half of those would’ve gone in, nobody would be questioning anything," he said following this morning’s skate.

While I appreciate that he's been a bit unlucky, that statement is not true, and I really hope he doesn't think it is. The gap between (A) the expected performance of a $5.5M/yr "#1 centre" (acquired for a steep price) playing next to Jarome Iginla and (B) Jokinen's performance to date this season is a lot wider than that.

Go Flames.

Sounds about right

2009-11-15T18:54:00.002-07:00

"...we spent about five years lambasting the organization at almost every turn, and I don’t think its an exaggeration to say that there was some hostility on both sides towards the others. We were fans of the team, but not of the organization, and they weren’t big fans of us either. There were times when it became clear that rooting for the team to fail was our best option, because things weren’t getting better without hitting rock bottom.

They hit rock bottom in 2008. And things have gotten significantly better since then, and not just in the decision making that goes into putting the roster together..."

--USS Mariner

Still waiting on that whole "getting better" thing, but otherwise, this is pretty spot-on.

Glove tap to Avi for the link.

The Return of Friday

2009-11-13T10:54:00.001-07:00

**The trapezoid was back in the news again, and the usual Devils/Stars fans were agitating for its removal. (As well as some new people who have decided that, as a means of reducing boarding, it makes more sense that penalizing boarding more harshly.) I was chatting with Cosh about this nearly 3 years ago, and he nailed it IMO:

me: I find the whole "why should one of Goalie X's skills be neutralized by some rule?" to be very uncompelling.
Colby: It's not a bad question to ask, but when the obvious answer is "Because X's skill really has nothing to do with the essence of the game and isn't any fun to watch", why bother asking.

**Also on the GMs: what's interesting to me is not so much the fact of the change (or "softening") of position on head hits, but rather the way the change was framed. Not to put too fine a point on it, but if George McPhee really thinks the NHL rulebook can be employed with this kind of surgical precision...

“The only issue I have is when the player is vulnerable, there is a blindside hit and the only contact is made to the player’s head. [...] If there are three or four of those a year, maybe we can attack and eliminate a lot of them.”

...he's just dreaming. As I wrote a couple of autumns ago, in the course of getting rid of some unwanted physical play, you're going to end up eliminating some wanted physical play. If someone (besides Bob McKenzie) wanted to be grown up about it, they could just be frank: there will be a bit of a tradeoff, but it's the right decision. Which, it is.

**My favourite contribution to #unpublishedNHLbooks on Twitter yesterday (I'm @FenwickMatt btw) was, "Now I Can Die In Peace", by Tom Benjamin. Nothing personal Tom, I just went for the most well-known Canucks fan I could think of (and thought using Jim Hughson or Michael Buble would confuse the gag).

**There is no way no spin Olli Jokinen's awful performance this season in a positive way. I'm changing my assessment of him from "Bad player with a good shot" to "Bad player with a hard shot".

** This month's Post I Wish I Had Written: Kent's appreciation of Craig Conroy. I second every word.

**Pleasant surprise of the season: Kipper. If he's back as a Top 10-15 NHL goalie, that mitigates a lot of other worries.

**Flames @ Slugs tonight. They haven't won in Buffalo in 13 years, so I think I'll just cheer for no one to get injured. Go Flames.

Don't know, but if, then totally

2009-11-10T10:27:00.008-07:00

"And while it's far too early to know whether Darryl Katz's dream-arena plan will go ahead, if it does come to pass, it will be vital to have an LRT line running straight from West Edmonton Mall to the new arena site."

--Paula Simons, Edmonton Journal

Um, okay, I have a question. Why? Why is a straight line from WEM to The Katz & LaForge World-Class Wonder Emporium™ "vital?" I mean, vital is a pretty serious word. Synonyms include "essential," "paramount," and "imperative." So when I see a journalist suggesting that level of importance to a public transit line running from a mall to a hockey rink-- a hockey rink that doesn't even exist, and if it does, with all its apparent city-healing powers, will likely cost taxpayers so much money that it will prevent some of those very same public transit lines from being built--I have to ask, really? It's that important? That crucial? So important that to think otherwise is unfathomable? Why? Because we'll need to get people from one big casino to another? Because people will be pissed if they can't get from Bootlegger to box seat in under twenty minutes? Oh! Oh! Is it because doing so will rejuvenate, rehab, renew, restore, refresh, refurbish, regenerate, reinvigorate, revitalize, and revivify the downtown core, transforming Edmonton into a shiny, shimmering, utopian metropolis ? Is this the case? It is, right? Okay, then. If you say so.

I'm agnostic about a line going to WEM. If it's the best place to end or anchor the line, so be it. But I'm pretty certain that building a straight line from there to a new arena isn't the best course of action. And it's definitely not vital. For one, the arena doesn't exist. Second, it never should, if it means taxpayers have to foot the bill. Third, as Patrick LaForge has noted, there will only be 90 hockey events there every year. Even if you scatter in another 75-100 events throughout the year (and I am being generous), the reality is that the "anchor tenant" (I'm assuming the full-blown Wonder Emporium™ will be the course of action, because it's the best way to trick people into supporting the public funding model) will be full less than half a year, every year, and even then only for a few hours at a time. Why would you build a straight line to a destination that, in the grand scheme of things, no one goes to? Because there'll also (supposedly) be a casino, some shops and some housing around it? There's lots of places like that (shockingly, they didn't need an adjacent arena and public funding to get built). Are we going to say it's vitally important to build straight lines to all those places, too?

Listen, I'm all for more public transit. And I'm all for public transit that takes people where they actually need to go. As with most cities, getting people in and out of our downtown core in an efficient, expedient and environmentally-friendly manner makes sense. Heck, it's important. What isn't important, however, especially not vitally important, is getting that public transit line to go straight from a mall to a proposed hockey arena, particularly when it's motivated by the unsubstantiated and therefore misguided belief that doing so will revitalize or save a section of our city. This simply will not happen. An LRT line will move people from place A to place B. You want each place to be an optimal destination. A new, publicly funded hockey arena will make Daryl Katz even more wealthy than he already is. You'll probably think it's cool. If those are your points, or your goals, then great. But let's just leave it at that, and save the vitally important words for the vitally important matters.

Battle Gameday: Sailing

2009-10-24T15:14:00.004-06:00

"Fantasy, it gets the best of me
When I'm sailing, all caught up in the reverie"

I've being listening to Yacht Rock all day. Hence the Christopher Cross reference. Even made a Yacht Rock mix. Got me some Cross, the Michael McDonald-led Doobie Brothers, Steely Dan, Hall & Oates, Boz Scaggs, Toto, Kenny Loggins...all of it. So white. So smooth. So wonderful.

So far so good with the Oilers this year. 6-2-1 on the season. 2nd in the NW, 4th in the Western Conference. 36GF. 26GA. Dustin Penner tied (with Ryan Smyth) for 4th in league scoring with 14 points. And all this with a bunch of key players (Fernando Pisani, Sheldon Souray, Steve Staios, and Marc Pouliot) injured. Not too bad, right?

Nope, not too shabby. I'm the biggest cynic in the world when it comes to this hockey club, and even I'm impressed. At the same time, there are concerns. They've only played two games on the road. They've only beaten two teams with a winning record (Dallas and Columbus). The injuries, and a crazy case of the flu, have exposed the lack of depth at forward. They still look really bad in their own end, continually failing to clear the zone. They like to give up goals in the last minute of periods. The starting goaltender plays rebounds like he's playing a game of Pong. The coach isn't Bill Walsh. And Dustin Penner isn't Frank Mahovlich. So, you know, some perspective is probably in order.

As Matt so kindly pointed out, the 2006-2007 Oilers started out 6-2. That was the year of "The Vaunt." They beat some good teams to start the season, too, including the Flames, Sharks, Canucks and Red Wings. Then the wheels came off (on October 25th they were hammered 6-2 by the Ducks and their new defenceman, Chris Pronger). My shrink has advised me to not spend too much time dwelling on that season, but let's just say that it didn't end on a high note.

I'm not saying this season is going to go off the rails like the 06-07 season did (may the Good Lord have mercy on our souls if it does). But there's still a lot of hockey to be played, and this team hasn't really been tested. Tonight's a good test. So too are the next 12 games, 9 of which are on the road. If they can avoid a late-game screwup against the Flames tonight (wouldn't that be nice?), and go even 6-6 over the next 12, I'll be a lot more convinced that this team is the real deal. Right now it's all just a fantasy.

Prediction: What this fool believes is that Oilers ride like the wind in a 5-3 victory. Minute by minute, they take it to the streets, cycle the puck lowdown, and make my dreams come true. Ya mo be thinking Hemmer gets the hatty, and Chopper reels back the years with a pair. Sarah smiles, and the boys Lido shuffle all the way to Margaritaville to meet Rosanna for some post-game celebrations.

GOILERS

Potpourri for 5-2-1, Alex

2009-10-20T15:19:00.001-06:00

Before I type this next sentence, I want to assure you that I am not on any type of drugs. Okay, here goes: Brian McGrattan was the best player on the ice for Calgary on Friday.

Yeahhhhh, let's not get carried away here, Lambert. He had a fine game -- and for Brian McGrattan, a tremendous one -- but he was the 3rd best player on his line. Prust set up two beauty chances in the high slot, the 2nd of which resulted in McG's assist when his miss was redirected into the net by Boyd. The goal came on one of the several chances Boyd created.

Full credit to McG for getting into good scoring position three distinct times. If he averages 1/3 that rate over all the games he plays this season, I'll be thrilled. But he wasn't the guy making things happen out there. And you know what? He's not going to average a scoring chance per game. Not close. It was his first goal in 91 games; no amount of improved skill and luck will turn him into a reliably competent player in the offensive end.

And it's not like this is all calculator skepticism either. In Eric Godard's third game as a Flame, on October 13, 2007, he drove the net on a 2-on-1 with Stephane Yelle and potted the game-winning goal. This spurred some chatter along the lines of ,"Well if he can chip in once in a while on the scoresheet, as well as providing some energy and a physical presence, then we might have a gem in this here heavyweight."

We didn't. He didn't score again in the subsequent (and final) 76 games of his Flames career. He scored twice last season for the Cup champ Pens, dressing for 71 of 82 regular season games and 0 of 24 playoff games. So I guess what I'm trying to say is: my expectations for Brian McGrattan's helpfulness going forward, with respect to Winning, have not been raised one iota.

**Congratulations to the Oilers; they haven't looked this good in October since the Lupul team started 6-2.

**This crossed my mind a few times in the past couple of weeks: I wonder if the NW Division is the new SE Division. It certainly seems, early on here, that every team has serious flaws -- the NW may spend this season getting bootstomped by the other two divisions, and have one of those races where the div champ gets the 3rd seed and the runner-up finishes 9th.

**Thanks to Robert Cleave for pointing out this brief blog post by radio colour guy & WHA legend Mike Rogers. First Rogers lets the cat out of the bag:

People make out that Sutter’s system is so complicated that Albert Einstein would have trouble figuring it out. Brent’s approach is no different than pretty well every team in the NHL.

I knew it! I frickin' knew it. Every time a team gets a new coach, the players gush about his new system, and say something almost exactly like, "Coach has got us playing a lot more aggressive, up-tempo game [...] we just have to make smart decisions." Accordingly, it derives straight from Rogers' comments that, within a fairly narrow range, there is a commonly-accepted "right way" to play successful hockey.

So why the problem? The system will only work as long as the individual will buy in and I believe that some of the Flames players are not willing to do so. Playing a strong defensive game is not glamorous, but scoring goals is. So what would the player rather do? I think you know the answer. Once the individual commits to the idea that everyone has to be on the same page, the team will be successful.

I dunno, Mike. If the players are being asked to do things that are "no different than pretty well every team in the NHL", then how can this be a committment thing? How did the players on the Flames roster get to where they are today if they can't do the things that are acknowledged league-wide as being important? If Jarome Iginla had 7 goals right now, but an identical number of goals against, would you suggest that he needs to commit to a strong defensive game, or that there was any problem at all? I think you know the answer.

**Get well soon, Moss. Go Flames.

If only

2009-10-16T19:59:00.000-06:00

If only the Oilers had a Coach who put an "emphasis on determining and going with what actually leads to success (wins) . . . rather than "hamstring[ing his team's] chances of victory based on some antiquated and unproven model of success".

"There's a thousand stats and the one I look at the most is chances, for and against," said Quinn.

Dummy.

Ahhhh, I'm just bustin' your balls Andy. I could care less what he looks at, so long as he keeps those Irish eyes a smilin'.

RBIs

2009-10-10T18:24:00.000-06:00

Seems like Matt and I are enjoying the same stuff right now.

"The radio guys here protest a little … they point out that while Drew’s OPS is usually good, they aren’t sure that it has led to PRODUCTION — namely runs scored and RBIs. And this is when Theo really takes over. I bold out a few of my favorite thoughts in this wonderful little lesson:

"That’s not true. With RBIs, yes. Based on his skill set, he’s always going to have underwhelming RBI totals. I couldn’t care less. When you’re putting together a winning team, that honestly doesn’t matter.When you have a player who takes a ton of walks, who doesn’t put the ball in play at an above average rate, and is a certain type of hitter, he’s not going to drive in a lot of runs. Runs scored, you couldn’t be more wrong. If you look at a rate basis, J.D. scores a ton of runs.

“And the reason he scores a ton of runs is because he does the single most important thing you can do in baseball as an offensive player. And that’s NOT MAKE OUTS. He doesn’t make outs. He’s always among our team leaders in on-base percentage, usually among the league leaders in on-base percentage. And he’s a really good base runner. So when he doesn’t make outs, and he gets himself on base, he scores runs — and he has some good hitters hitting behind him. Look at his runs scored on a rate basis with the Red Sox or throughout his career. It’s outstanding.

“You guys can talk about RBIs if you want, I just … we ignore them in the front office … and I think we’ve built some pretty good offensive clubs. If you want to talk about RBIs at all, talk about it as a percentage of opportunity but it’s just simply not a way or something we use to evaluate offensive players.”

--Joe Posnanski, on Theo Epstein on J.D. Drew

Now, I am well aware that baseball isn't hockey. I say this to preempt the people who will want to drive home this point in the comments section, knowing full well that they will say it anyway. Baseball is not hockey. Hockey is not baseball. Baseball is not hockey. I know. I get it. And I don't care. What I care about is the broader point of Posnanski's post, and Epstein's interview, which is this: far too many professional sports teams, sport reporters, and sports fans focus on aspects of their particular game that are either secondary or irrelevant to the game's primary purpose, which is winning. They elevate things that, while perhaps fun and entertaining, haven't really been proven to exist or matter. Coaches who talk about players needing more "crust" in their game, for example. Fans who brag about a player being the team's best body-checker, for another. Reporters who mythologize a player for being "clutch" in "crunch time." Me, I'd rather people--managers, coaches, players, reporters, fans--worried more about figuring out what things actually determine success in a sport. Do I know exactly what those things are? Hell, no. But I do have some guesses.

In hockey, for example, I'm more concerned with scoring rates than hit totals. I'm more interested in who a player is playing against, and how he is doing against those players, than I am in his leadership skills. I'm more concerned with finding players who drive results, and less interested in whether or not he is really good at driving a guy's head into the boards. I'm more interested in net total shots on net and driving possession than "errors" and the plus/minus. I'm that way because I'm guessing (I've been convinced, actually) that some of these things are more important in determining the outcome of a game than the things we've traditionally looked at and used to determine outcomes (and excellence). You want to win? Have guys on your team who do these things well. Forget about how "big" his heart is, those "huge" goals he scores, and whether or not he can impale an opponent on his stick like a trident.

Listen, I like physical hockey and fighting as much as the next guy. It gets the blood up, it gets the crowd into a game, and it's just plain fun to watch. But you know what I like more than an entertaining hockey game? One where my team wins. If I just wanted physical entertainment without results, I'd watch the Three Stooges. But I want my team to win, and I remain unconvinced that having it littered with bruisers is going to maximize that result. Am I saying that "physical hockey" is unimportant? No. It may in fact be. But I don't think it's been proven to really matter as much as "scoring hockey." That's what I want first and foremost on my hockey team. Guys who score goals. Also, guys who score goals and prevent other guys from scoring goals. That's really the ideal. If they do it by playing physically, great. But that's an added bonus, not a primary concern. When I see a near historically bad NHL player getting first-line minutes because he's big and hits people, a little bit of my sanity dies. Why? Because the bottom-line is the guy isn't helping his team win when he is placed in that position. His skill set does not match up with what is required to win hockey games. And the coach isn't helping his team win, either. In fact, he's hamstringing their chances of victory, based on some antiquated and unproven model of success. And there goes my sanity, right out the window!

Then again, I may be wrong. Maybe all those traditional ways of looking at a hockey player, and his performance, matter. But I'd like to move away from the acceptance of these things simply because that's the way it's always been, and move more towards an acceptance of these things because that's the way they really are. I'd like there to be more emphasis on determining and going with what actually leads to success (wins), and less emphasis placed on what takes us back to making ill-informed and unproven observations and evaluations. If that means heart and soul and body-checking and all that other stuff really matters, rock n' roll.

And that's my thought for the day.

Battle Game Day

2009-10-08T16:29:00.000-06:00

Flames @ Oilers, 730PM MT, RSN West. So not only have I not found time to put up much of a post today, I'm also going to be curling tonight at the Saville Centre (w/ Sacamano) and will miss the 2nd and 3rd periods. I think I'll wear my Warrener 44 jersey, so mental note, keep my head up. Two things though:

Scott Reynolds' wonderful Gospel of Hockey preview routine, now featured at Copper & Blue, reminded me of this Battle Game Day from 4(!) seasons ago.

Also, Vic and Dennis are back. Vic shows that, as recorded so far, Scoring Chance +/- and Corsi# correspond awfully closely. Dennis is kibbitzing at Lowetide's; here is his latest presented without comment in its entirety.

It seems like I am always picking up for this guy:) but even though I've never had the same injury as 78, I have been injured in that area before and let me tell you, it's pure hell.

It happened while I was at the gym and attempting an exercise on an ab machine and because I'd been doing like 150 situps-a-day for like 2 years before I even started at a gym, I figured I would be Boss when it came to this piece of equipement. Well, I set the gauge too high and when I did the first crunch, I could literally feel something tear.

This was just before christmas and I was gonna stay away from the gym for a couple of weeks anyway so when I finished up that day, I said I'd take awhile off and hopefully this would heal (I had finished my workout after feeling this tear because you never really full the full effects of an injury until the adrenaline wears off, anyway).

So, for a week I'm a little sore but then I start my christmas drinking and my stomach literally grinds everytime I take a drop and the next morning it's like I'm pissing honest-to-goodness fire.

Note: I still powered through because it was Christmas;)

Anyway, as soon as I got back to town after the holidays, I tried out the gym again and wound up in the absolute racks-of-pain for a full week. I remember going to the gym on a Monday and for the first next few days I could hardly get out of bed. I mean I had shooting pains in my stomach, groin, my balls, my ass and even in the head of my Brian Burke! The #1 and #2 bodily functions were resolute murder and I didn't know what was going on.

Note: I hope LT's daughter isn't reading this!

So I go to the doctor and he says it's likely prostatitis and it's either from a muscle pull or an infection. I get a bunch of bloodwork done - if you have this, you want it to be from an infection because that's the easiest way to treat it - but no such luck, it's a muscle pull.

So the doctor tells me no physical activity for six weeks and even when I resumed that, I should consider giving up alcohol and caffeine for an even longer period of time.

So, because I'd been in such rough shape before, I went from early Jan to early June without drinking a beer because I was fearful of bringing the pain back upon myself. And because I wasn't hungover or hungover hungry, I eventually worked out like never before and went to the gym six days a week and was in the best shape possible.

Note: my friends kept going out once a weekend but I've never been one to go out without getting hammered:)

Also, do you know what the doctor suggested would sooth flare-ups?

E-jackulation!

So, the girlfriend wasn't overly happy about that but I certainly was:D

The moral of this story is I don't know what's going on with 78 but I feel bad for the kid and I felt like sharing.

Go Oilers?

Calgary 5 (Iginla, Phaneuf x2, Conroy, Boyd) Edmonton 4 (probably the Comrie-Brule-Stone line, that looks fearsome). Go Flames.

Thought for the Day

2009-10-07T09:47:00.002-06:00

From a piece by Chicagoan Steve Chapman, Chicago Wins By Losing: Why losing the Olympics is a blessing in disguise for the Windy City:

Here, as elsewhere, public opinion does not always matter. When the mayor and assorted corporations and interest groups line up behind something, even a grandiose vanity project, it's a good bet they will prevail over petty malcontents.

Insightful? Not particularly. True, and well said? Yep-per.

Flames Game Day

2009-10-06T15:15:00.000-06:00

The Lions in Winter come for an autumn visit to the Saddledome tonight (7PM MT, RSN West). The reaction around Flamesland to the lads' 2-0-0 start seems to be pretty much unanimous: they don't look that great yet, but it's nice to see Kipper making some stops, and we'll sure as hell take the points.

I quite agree, and for beyond the usual reasons (i.e. better to hav'em than not hav'em, they count the same as ones earned in March, etc.). Because of the Flames' unevenly compressed schedule this season, it's absolutely critical for them to gain points when they're healthy and coming off of real rest. I may get into this again next week, but for now let's just note that in the next 8 days, the Flames play 5 games. In the following 21 days, the Flames play... 5 games.

In other words, a game like tonight's -- off 2 days' rest, at home, opponent not a powerhouse -- represents points the Flames cannot afford to get away. Because even if they're playing really well after Christmas, they have 14 games in 23 nights: what would you use as an optimistic forecast for that stretch, that includes 4 games in 5 nights twice?

Calgary 4 (Iginla x2, Jokinen x2) Lez Habz 1 (Cammo). Go Flames.

Thought for the Day

2009-10-05T22:12:00.002-06:00

Bill James said something a while ago that I thought was about as good a thought about bad baseball teams as anything I’ve heard. He said, “The future is not a plan.” And I think that’s exactly right. Every baseball team has a future. Every one. Every team has “prospects” — Baseball America next year will list off 30 for each team. Every team is loaded down with players in Class A who, if things go well, can emerge as the next great superstar. Every team has pitchers who could, and hitters who might, and catchers who should, and base runners who conceivably can. Every team in baseball.

And because every team has a future, it’s easy to fool yourself. It’s easy to talk about how things will get better. This is not always a bad thing. This is what gives fans hope every spring training. This is what keeps players inspired. This is what keeps baseball people going forward. And sometimes, rarely, a team even might fool itself into believing that it is better than the apparent talent and play at that higher level, at least for a while.

But … more often than not, fooling yourself isn’t much of a plan for survival. And thus, The Hochevar Principle: The future comes to all teams. Some teams wait for it. Those teams finish in last place a lot.

-- Joe Posnanski, Kansas City Royals fan, today

Battle Gameday

2009-10-03T18:07:00.002-06:00

Don't know if Matt is throwing anything up, so I'll just give a quick prediction. I had a busy day at the waterpark that prevented me from doing anything further. I'd apologize, but it's the waterpark. That's a park, full of water slides. And a wave pool. And hot tubs. And girls far too young for me. Yeah. Exactly. BUSY.

Can any honest Oilers fan look at this depth chart and not be horrified? Who the hell are these guys? JF Jacques? Ryan Stone? WHO THE F**K IS RYAN STONE? And I haven't even gotten to Brule and Stortini yet. Or Comrie. Sweet Mother of Thor. Why did I start blogging again? Oh, right. "Flame Killer" Nikolai Khabibulin. Right (eyeroll).

Prediction: 6-5, Oilers. Gilbert Gilbert, Hemmer, Cogliano, and Scorcoff with the triple. Six fights, including a real donnybrook involving Pat Quinn and bare-knuckled boxing legend Brent O'Sutter that will be borderline erotic. Save percentages for both goalies below .800.

GOILERS???

Opening Night

2009-10-01T16:57:00.000-06:00

A handful of thoughts and predictions on the cusp of the 2009/10 season:

**The Canucks might well win the NW Division again, but I'm not at all clear on why they're supposed to be better than last year (apart from Luongo starting 70+ games instead of 54). They traded in Ohlund for Ehrhoff on D, which certainly doesn't constitute a clear upgrade; they still don't have any "value contracts" on the back end.

Up front, they still have the Sedins and Kesler kicking ass, but they don't appear to be better. Demitra's hurt. Samuelsson is not that good. It's the same bunch of bleh in terms of depth.

**In fact, I think the Flames probably will win the NW. Losing Cammalleri's 39 goals (19 PP) isn't "good", but replacing those goals on the #21 PP seems a lot more doable than had it been the #1 PP.

I'm with the crowd that saw Jarome Iginla have a worse year in 08/09 than his stats would indicate, but I'm not (quite) yet worried about a steep decline from #12. I'm also with the crowd that thinks there's nowhere to go but up for Phaneuf this season. Also, you may have heard, they added the #1 UFA on the market.

I don't have much faith that Kipper will bounce back, or even stop getting worse, but the good news is that further decline can only cost the team so much. There's a certain point past which his contract and past accomplishments won't matter, and the org will try something different. Maybe McE plays well in relief and takes more and more of the workload; maybe they trade for Martin Biron or the like; who knows. At any rate, my current stance is that -- whatever the mechanism -- the Flames goaltending is quite unlikely to be worse than last year, and it could easily be better.

**The thing with the Oilers is, there's just very little basis on which to predict improvement. For every youngish guy pegged to improve, there's an oldish guy who might well get worse. While it's one thing to think Khabibulin is a better goalie than Roloson (maybe he is), it's quite another to think that Khabibulin 09/10 can outperform Roloson 08/09.

And while Quinn/Renney are clearly sound NHL coaches, there's just little or no evidence that they're going to do things much differently than Mac-T, certainly in the area of "encouraging offense and creativity". I heard Ryan Rishaug on TEAM 1260 on Monday, trying to explain how he thought Quinn's handling of the youngsters/skill players was an improvement. It made absolutely no sense, and with Jason Gregor's prodding, he ended up taking back the whole thing item by item.

**I think Chicago will be clearly better than Detroit, the rest of the Central, and the rest of the conference save for maybe San Jose (I'm not quite sure what to think about the Sharks yet). The goaltending concerns there are way overblown -- Huet's pretty good -- and among skaters, almost every one should be expected to improve to some degree. And they were a bloody good team last year. My pick for the President's Trophy.

**My breakout pick is the Kings. They added a great player in Smytty, and I think Kopitar will bust out -- the percentages weren't kind to him last year. Also, both my fantasy teams are way too dependent on this pick.

**I can't think of a single thing, off the top of my head, that interests me about the Eastern Conference. See you in June, fellas.

**Did you know:

A loss tonight for the Flames would mark their seventh consecutive loss in season openers – tying the mark for the longest losing streak in season openers with the 1972-78 Minnesota NorthStars and the 1993-1999 Anaheim Ducks.

Last season, the Flames opened their season with a 6-0 loss to the Canucks at GM Place.

I hate to go out on a limb, but I'm pretty positive that tonight the Flames will improve upon last season's Opening Night performance (vs Canucks, 8PM MT, CBC). Let's say Calgary 3 (Moss, Iginla, Giordano) Vancouver 2 (DSedin x2). Go Flames.

Tea Leaves

2009-10-01T10:51:00.002-06:00

"The Oilers will avoid making the mistake all bad teams make, panicking, and refuse to rush into any bad decisions. They won't fire their coach and bring in a grizzled retiree who pontificates non-stop about "heart" and "soul." They won't waste months chasing the sniper who has absolutely no desire to live and play in a northern Canadian city. They won't bid against themselves and overpay for an ancient goalie coming off of a career year. And they won't sign a pint-sized centre whose greatest hockey achievement is that he was once asked by a general manager to pay back a large chunk of his contract.

No, the Oilers will avoid all of these things, instead focus on reasonably priced depth, acquiring someone who can actually win a faceoff, and making their current stadium a provincial heritage site, and remain a shining star in the NHL firmament.

4th in the Northwest, 12th in the West."

My prediction on the Oilers season, via In The Box. If you were looking for optimism or smoke up your a@%, you've come to the wrong place. Try the Journal instead.

The Flames and Canucks roll tonight. I hope both teams spontaneously combust. The Oil hit the ground running on Saturday, on Hockey Night in Canada, in the first BoA tilt of the season. It's go-time, folks.

GOILERS.

Breaking

2009-09-29T09:42:00.002-06:00

McKenzie: Islanders pick up ~~poor~~ homeless man's John Tavares to play with John Tavares.

My 2-year-old Schremp scouting report here.

It's only hard if you make it hard

2009-09-28T16:59:00.001-06:00

The old Local Team's Enforcer is a Real Human Being! story is a September fixture in many NHL cities; Vicki Hall is a fine and capable writer/reporter; and Brian McGrattan is just doing what he can to earn a terrific living for as long as possible.

So I'm not directing this at either Hall or McGrattan when I say that this article from Sunday's Calgary Herald is beyond embarrassing.

“I want to lead the league in majors this year,” McGrattan says, peeling off his blinding yellow practice jersey. “And I think this is the right division to do it.”

The tattooed enforcer looks across the room at Jarome Iginla and Olli Jokinen.

“I can’t wait,” McGrattan says, “for the first guy who runs one of these guys.

“That will give me the green light to go get ’em.”

I'm not anti-fighting, but that kinda makes my skin crawl. Also, while I sincerely hope that he really does have sobriety figured out for good, your typical 20-years-sober alcoholic comes off as more humble and guarded about the whole issue than McGrattan does at 9+ months.

Mostly, it's just galling that the Flames gave a one-way contract to a guy who can only "help his team" by fighting, even though he's not yet recovered from shoulder surgery, and has the substance abuse baggage noted above. Jaffray and Lundmark were waived today, both of whom would help the Flames score/prevent goals and win games from the 4th line more than McGrattan could hope to. It's a real blot on what was otherwise a pretty solid summer by management.

Thought for the Day

2009-09-23T07:42:00.002-06:00

The best way to win a lot of hockey games is to get off the bus with the best players.

-- Jack Parker, Boston University coach, career record 816-412-101 (via a Pipeline Show clip on TEAM1260)

Battle Game Day

2009-09-15T14:14:00.000-06:00

Hurray, it's hockey! Though calling it "NHL hockey" might be a stretch, at least looking at the lineup the Flames are icing tonight (7PM MT, web stream). Moss, Boyd, Lundmark, Dawes, and Nystrom are the "veterans" skating against the Oilers at the 'Dome tonight; looks like Quinn is dressing a more traditional preseason mix of vets and hopefuls.

I commented last week at M&G that

I sincerely hope that with the myriad 4th-line-types signed up this offseason, there’s legit competition for those spots, i.e. the org has an open mind about who will be in the Opening Night lineup. I can’t get too jazzed about any given 4th-line trio, but I CAN get jazzed about the idea that the three best performers thru camp/preseason — out of 8 or 9 competitors — get the gig. Depth, in that sense, could be a strength. And the team probably needs it to be one.

In this context, I'm very encouraged by Coach Sutter's roster tonight; looks to me like the beginning of a 15-day Battle Royale for a job at the bottom of the forward corps. Right now there are 7 guys who will certainly dress for every regular season game in which they're healthy: Iginla, Langkow, Jokinen, Conroy, Glencross, Bourque, and Moss. There's another 4 who essentially have jobs, but could conceivably be healthy scratches on occasion (or be punted to the minors if they're really struggling): Boyd, Dawes, Sjostrom and Nystrom.

That leaves 2 spots open for the winning, to my eye, as well as the whole concept of making a good impression and being an early callup when the inevitable injuries come. I typically agree with Tyler's take that your crystal ball need be no more complicated than looking for who has one-way contracts (meaning Prust and McGrattan will be the lucky two), but I think this season might constitute special circumstances.

Last season the team paid Eriksson $1.5M to play in the minors and paid Rhett Warrener ~$2.4M to convalesce from his various injuries/surgeries, just to get down to the cap at the beginning of the season. In other words, they spent a lot of dead money from Day 1. That's not the case this season, and particularly with a new coach, I think that if 1 or 2 borderline guys with 2-way deals make a big impression on Coach Sutter from now until October 1, then GM Sutter will make room for those guys in the big leagues one way or another.

That group is probably represented by: Brett Sutter, David Van der Gulik, Kris Chucko, Kyle Greentree, Jason Jaffray, Jamie Lundmark, Colin Stuart, and Garth Murray.

Greg Nemisz and Mitch Wahl are in that unfortunate Draft+1yr cohort of "Would be Better Off Playing in the AHL, But Have to Go Back to Junior". Very little chance they make the big club.

This leaves the two most interesting hopefuls in camp. Mikael Backlund is... something. He was a good junior player in his stint with Kelowna, but he's not the next Peter Forsberg. He's not even the next Daymond Langkow. But he might well be a quality NHLer. First step, though, is to take the step up to the AHL, and start (continue?) internalizing the fact that he's not going to score enough to hang around the perimeter or be an indifferent two-way player.

The other, of course, is the Little Big Man. I won't hem and haw here: I think his invitation to camp is tremendously exciting, and I'm thrilled for him. I take Tom Benjamin's point that, in the big picture, the Flames might not be doing him any favours, but I'll disagree nonetheless. He's been sober for ~ 4 years, not six months, and has gone through financial and family tribulations in the interim. "Not an emotionally healthy person" is probably true, now and forever, but I guess my sense is that Fleury's not quite as fragile as TB thinks he is. And further, that even if this comeback attempt falls short, it might be more beneficial than detrimental to Fleury's psyche.

At any rate: a wildly successful training camp and preseason for Fleury means a two-way, league min. deal to play in Abbotsford for the Heat. There is zero chance he makes the Flames out of TC. If he looks like he can still play -- even if he looks like he can still help an NHL team -- he'll be sent to the AHL; to see if his body can keep up with the grind for a couple months, to see if he can be effective all over the ice over a larger sample of games, and, yes, to see if he folds under the pressure.

The "Holy Shit, Woo-HOO!!!" Scenario is Fleury scoring 28 points in the first 20 games with the Heat, then coming up to the Flames and adding something to depth and 2nd-unit PP (and of course, getting his name on the Stanley Cup 21 years after the 1st time, but I digress). I think the best-case scenario though, as in, more realistic and something every Fleury fan could cheer for, is:

hero's reception in a preseason game
capable performance in camp and preseason
contract, off to Abbotsford
competes hard, but realizes he's not a difference-maker any more
officially retires in mid-December, as he misses his family, dislikes the travel, and is realistic about his chances for promotion or improvement
happy he went through the whole process anyway, as it gave him some closure on his career
#14 is retired to the Saddledome rafters in March

Fingers crossed, folks.

Thought for the Day

2009-09-07T12:01:00.000-06:00

All of economics is devoted to the proposition that there is no such thing as a free lunch. All of politics is devoted to the opposite conviction. All economics teaches that you can’t get something for nothing. All politics supposes that you can -- or that you can at least persuade other people that you can. Economics is about scarcity, universal and inescapable. Politics is about limitless plenty.

Consider that 98% of all bad policy amounts to nothing more than ignoring opportunity costs: the simple axiom that the cost of something is measured not just by the actual sum of money used to produce it, but what the same funds might have purchased, diverted to another end -- the profits forgone, the jobs not created, because that money was spent in one way and not another.

-- Andrew Coyne, October 9, 2007

Stuff we can agree on

2009-09-04T16:36:00.000-06:00

Northlands showed it is Edmonton's "sports and entertainment complex experts" after Rexall Place was ranked 10th in the world for concert and event ticket sales, an official with the non-profit group says.

What conclusions are reasonable to draw from this? I think there's a couple:

Rexall Place is, at the least, a good concert/event venue
Northlands is, at the least, a competent venue manager

Based on such a high standing, it would seem awfully hard to argue that Northlands is enjoying tremendous success despite a lousy facility (making chicken salad out of chicken shit); likewise, it would be hard to argue that people are packing the place despite barely competent management by an out-of-touch quasi-government agency.

Which brings us to Pat Laforge on Monday... when asked about the future of Rexall Place, he said:

"Our lease expires in the spring of 2014. ... We're a tenant here and we don't own the building so I can't offer speculation on what might happen to it. But it's been a great building and it still is."

David Staples translated this to mean (and Jonathan Willis seems to agree), "Not our problem".

But whether Staples and Willis are misinterpreting, or Laforge is being disingenous (No!), it clearly is an issue. Whatever scenarios exist for a new downtown arena being successful and profitable (or, self-supporting) involve the migration of all the concerts and a bunch of the other stuff from the old place to the new place.

There's a non-zero chance that, in the event of a taxpayer revolt (and a credible election threat to the mayor), the Oilers press on with the project through private financing. But this non-zero chance drops to zero-point-zero-zero if it's premised on competing with Northlands and the existing building for concerts and other non-hockey events. The abandonment (/demolition) of Rexall Place isn't a side effect of a downtown arena plan; it's a necessary element.

Which brings us back to the Are We Sure This Is Necessary question... I think the proponents and fans of a new downtown arena have done a pretty poor job of explaining why it's necessary, or alternatively, worth it, to abandon Rexall Place.

**I don't think there's any question that a new place would have dozens of features to recommend it over Rexall Place, but if you agree that money talks, customers aren't dissatisfied with Rexall (see top).

**I got the impression before I moved here that it might as well be out in Kanata, but jeez, it's 2 LRT stops (5 minutes) from the east end of downtown, and maybe 10 minutes from the west end/legislature. It's about as handy to downtown as you could want without being within walking distance.

**The CFR -- Rexall's 2nd most important tenant and a genuine boon to the city's economy -- is very likely to bolt for the Stampede grounds if "shuttling cattle back and forth downtown proves to be too complicated and costly". I'm not a logistics guy, but I sense that this would be a major challenge.

**And, I mentioned that I'm not a logistics guy, but even maintaining the existing level of concerts and events at a new downtown location won't be easy. There are no arterial roads to speak of near downtown Edmonton. Just given the price and availabilty of land, blacktop for parking and access around the new place will presumably be limited. But of course it's not "just given" that; the whole idea is to have lots of development around the arena, not lots of development around a 200m strip of asphalt around the arena.

Here's a couple of pics I snapped from the window of the Coliseum Inn, at about 9AM on the morning of a Rascall Flatts concert (after an Oilers game the night before).

Approximately 20 tractor-trailers and 10 Maddencruisers, all told. The difficulties in organizing something like this downtown are not at all insurmountable. That said, every square foot of space surrounding the building that's used for accommodating major concert acts and the like is a square foot that's not being used for the vitality (re-vitality?) of the surrounding development of retail, housing, etc. And as such, it must be acknowledged that the new plan has what everyone besides politicians call "tradeoffs".

Or, we could just pretend that the new place will be fairytale perfect, featuring everything you like about the old place, plus a reasonably-priced restaurant you like a few steps out the front door, and plenty of open urinals at intermission.

Sound and Fury

2009-09-01T10:36:00.009-06:00

"We found that the mainstream media in most of these cities is noticeably biased toward supporting publicly financed stadiums, which has a significant impact on the initiatives' success.

This bias usually takes the form of uncritically parroting stadium proponents' economic and social promises, quoting stadium supporters far more frequently than stadium opponents, overlooking the numerous objective academic studies on the topic, and failing to independently examine the multitude of failed stadium-centered promises throughout the country, especially those in oft-cited "success cities" such as Denver and Cleveland."

--Rick Eckstein, Philadelphia Enquirer

"Tremendously reassuring was LaForge's return, time and time again, to the rhetoric of making Edmonton great, emphasizing downtown revitalization, going on about improving the city. Which means that the development will strive to fit in and complement downtown, that the esthetics (or the "look") of the arena and surroundings won't be sacrificed on the altar of cost-cutting.

I'm convinced that lifelong Edmontonian Katz wants to leave a lasting legacy."

--Graham Hicks, Edmonton Sun

Ahem.

Some links from the past few days.

New Oilers Arena Underway--Gordon Kent, Edmonton Journal
Much Ado About Nothing--John MacKinnon, Edmonton Journal
Progress on Arena--Unsigned Editorial, Edmonton Journal
City in Dark on Arena--Frank Landry, Edmonton Sun
Patience is Key to Worthwhile Arena--Graham Hicks, Edmonton Sun
Despite Funding Questions, Edmonton Oilers Proceed With New Downtown Arena--Canadian Press
Arena Could Leave Poor Our in Cold, Advocates Say--Richard Warnica, Edmonton Journal
Edmonton Arena Developments--Brad Humphreys, International Journal of Sports Finance
Columbus a Model for Edmonton?--Scott Hennig, Canadian Taxpayers Federation
Katz Plan Should Go Ahead, But With Strict Conditions--Scott McKeen, Edmonton Journal

Downtown Arena Primer

2009-08-31T21:53:00.012-06:00

I'm going to place a link to this post in the left sidebar, and will continue to update it as time goes on. That way, people can come to the site, click on the link to the left, and get their hands on everything we have posted here.

This is, to my mind, the most comprehensive gathering of information and opinion around on the proposed downtown arena. Most of the opinion is mine, and therefore reflects my viewpoint (which is in opposition), but there are invaluable contributions, from both sides of the argument, within the comment sections of each post. There are also a large number of links to newspaper articles, academic articles, and other items within those posts. I encourage all to read through what is provided here, and to share it with others. I also encourage everyone to look for other sources of information on this issue. Like I said, these opinions are mine. I make no qualms about having them, believing them to be clear and rational, but I do encourage everyone to seek out other voices and opinions in making a determination on where they stand on the issue.

Arena Powerpoint
This powerpoint is a modified version of one I did several weeks ago, for a local group of concerned citizens. It does not include information related to the newest, $1 billion dollar idea for a downtown project. There has no been no official word on this idea, or how it will be funded, so I have not yet included it in the presentation.

Arena Powerpoint

View more presentations from agrabia.

Downloadable Documents
These two documents were created to supplement the powerpoint presentation above, and have been updated to include the most recent announcements. They will continue to be updated as events transpire.

21 Key Arena Posts

Front Page Challenge (Nov. 14, 2006)
Pyramid Power (Nov. 16, 2006)
Taxpayers To Buy Oilers An Arena (Apr. 24, 2007)
We Built This City (Apr. 24, 2007)
In Defence Of Northlands (Apr. 26, 2007)
Sixteen Candles (Apr. 26, 2007)
"...willing to be persuaded..." (Apr. 27, 2007)
A New Arena? Don't You Mean Saving Your Immortal Soul? (Oct. 1, 2007)
Where Would We Have Gotten That Idea? (Oct. 10, 2007)
Dan Mason Outdoes Himself (Jan. 4, 2008)
Questions (Jan. 7, 2008)
In Praise of Tradition, or And I Will Always Love You (Jan. 9, 2008)
Len Bias? No, No. I Said MEDIA Bias (Jan. 31, 2008)
Tonight In Rexall Village, Allan Ginsberg Will Perform A Reading Of "Howl" (Feb. 11, 2008)
Interview With Brad Humphreys (Feb. 18, 2008)
Arena Response: Letter #1 (Mar. 26, 2008)
An Arena Response: Letter #3 (Mar. 27, 2008)
Horse Race Reporting (July 22, 2008)
Hockey Draft? (Aug. 6, 2008)
Will Anyone Say No? (Aug. 27, 2009)
Columbus A Model For Edmonton? (August 31, 2009)

Complete List of Arena Posts

Front Page Challenge (Nov. 14, 2006)
Front Page Challenge, cont'd. (Nov. 15, 2006)
Pyramid Power (Nov. 16, 2006)
Let It No, Let It No, Let It No (Dec. 22, 2006)
Muh Mum Ma My... Arena (Jan. 18, 2007)
A $250 Million Doughnut (Feb. 22, 2007)
Friday Odds & Ends (Feb. 23, 2007)
And The Walls, Come Tumbling Down (Apr. 19, 2007)
Taxpayers To Buy Oilers An Arena (Apr. 24, 2007)
We Built This City (Apr. 24, 2007)
In Defence Of Northlands (Apr. 26, 2007)
Sixteen Candles (Apr. 26, 2007)
Sixteen Candles Update (Apr. 27, 2007)
"...willing to be persuaded..." (Apr. 27, 2007)
Economists? We Don't Need No Stinkin' Economists (Apr. 28, 2007)
Either/Or Else (Apr. 28, 2007)
How I Spent My Saturday Night (Apr. 30, 2007)
I Want A New Drug (May 5, 2007)
Caught In The Cookie Jar (May 16, 2007)
Visual Aids Can Be So Helpful (May 24, 2007)
*Victory! (June 2, 2007)
Yesterday (June 7, 2007)
I Guess Ominous Is In The Eye Of The Beholder (July 25, 2007)
A Little Help For My Friends (Aug. 13, 2007)
Let's Be Clear Here (Aug. 16, 2007)
So Fresh And So Clean (Sept. 11, 2007)
A New Arena? Don't You Mean Saving Your Immortal Soul? (Oct. 1, 2007)
Where Would We Have Gotten That Idea? (Oct. 10, 2007)
You Don't Say? (Oct. 11, 2007)
All The Great Ones Leave Their Mark. We're The Wet Bandits (Dec. 7, 2007)
Great, Bouncing Icebergs! (Dec. 14, 2007)
Oh...You Hit Santy Claus! Just For That, No Toys! (Dec. 15, 2007)
The Location Agreement (Jan. 3, 2008)
Dan Mason Outdoes Himself (Jan. 4, 2008)
Questions (Jan. 7, 2008)
In Praise of Tradition, or And I Will Always Love You (Jan. 9, 2008)
In Praise of Tradition, Redux (Jan. 19, 2008)
Lessons In Alberta Politics, 101 (Jan. 21, 2008)
Len Bias? No, No. I Said MEDIA Bias (Jan. 31, 2008)
Bohemian Like You (Feb. 8, 2008)
Tonight In Rexall Village, Allan Ginsberg Will Perform A Reading Of "Howl" (Feb. 11, 2008)
Interview With Brad Humphreys (Feb. 18, 2008)
Arena Response: Letter #1 (Mar. 26, 2008)
An Arena Response: Letter #2 (Mar. 27, 2008)
An Arena Response: Letter #3 (Mar. 27, 2008)
Arena Stories (Apr. 2, 2008)
It's Tradition! (May 28, 2008)
Canadian Teams, Including Oilers, Doing Just Fine (May 30, 2008)
Horse Race Reporting (July 22, 2008)
Hockey Draft? (Aug. 6, 2008)
Good News And Bad News (Aug. 23, 2009)
Will Anyone Say No? (Aug. 27, 2009)
Arena Press Conference (Aug. 30, 2009)
Columbus A Model For Edmonton? (Aug. 31, 2009)
Sound and Fury (Sept. 1, 2009)
Stuff We Can Agree On (Sept. 4, 2009)
Thought for the Day (Oct. 7, 2009)
Don't know, but if, then totally (Nov. 10, 2009)