My sincerest thanks goes out to Andrew M. Greenstein, The unofficial NHL Uniform Database, Chris Creamer’s SportsLogos.Net and Mike Lessiter’s “The Names of the Games” (Lessiter, M. [1988]. The names of the game: The stories behind the nicknames of 102 pro football, basketball, baseball, and hockey teams. Markham: Beaverbooks [Chicago: Contemporary Books]). Much has been made recently about the desire to change the names of sports teams carrying Aboriginal-related monikers to more politically-correct, socially-acceptable nicknames. Well, to be fair, the notion has likely been around for decades, but the omnipresence of the Internet has made both the expression and the dissemination of the idea significantly easier. Add to this the increasing willingness amongst governments to delve into the history of their tumultuous, often-shameful relations with Aboriginal communities – and acknowledge and apologise for the litany of wrongdoings – and the conditions are optimal for a frank societal discussion in North America over what we want our sports teams to represent.
Let’s pause on that word for a moment: “discussion”. It seems as though any representation of Aboriginals within the context of sports is increasingly seen as automatically offensive. I am not Aboriginal, nor am I of Aboriginal descent. I do not have any conception of what it is like to have my culture, language and values – and or of my ancestors – torn from me and scattered to the winds. And I do not have any conception of what it is like to have this tragic chapter of my ancestry relegated to an aside in a grade school textbook. Thus, I can confidently state that I am not the best person to be writing about this. However, I do bring an outsider’s perspective to the issue, a perspective influenced neither by cultural history nor team fandom. So, with that all said, let’s take a look at Aboriginal team names from the four major North American professional sports leagues: MLB Atlanta Braves BACKGROUND: According to Mike Lessiter’s The Names of the Games, the “Braves” name came about in 1911 – following several name changes for the then Boston-based franchise – due to new team owner James E. Gaffney having a reputation as a “brave” on the political scene. The team eventually moved on to Milwaukee and, finally, settled in Atlanta, retaining the Braves name. Early logos were certainly stereotypical and the move to Milwaukee arguably worsened this condition. Only in 1990 did the franchise finally settle on something more palatable. MY VIEW: A “brave” is defined by Merriam-Webster as a warrior of an Aboriginal group. The current logo is a tomahawk, a traditional Aboriginal tool and weapon. Though the past iterations of the logo are bad enough to make even the most iron-stomached among us nauseous, from the outside, there seems to be nothing explicitly wrong with the team’s current brand. But for the love of all that is good and pure Atlanta, knock it off with the “Fear the Chop” garbage. Seriously. We get that your logo is a tomahawk, but the music takes an already borderline tradition and drives it full speed into Wrong-Side-of-History Gorge. Cleveland Indians BACKGROUND: The Names of the Games cites Louis Francis Sockalexis as the inspiration for Cleveland’s moniker, who was, apparently, the first person of Aboriginal descent to play in the major leagues (this distinction is contested). Sockalexis played with the team for three seasons in the early 1900s. In 1915, shortly after his passing, the Cleveland franchise renamed their team the “Indians” as a tribute, though there is not universal agreement on this point. The early logo history is abysmal, a condition that only worsened after the introduction of “Chief Wahoo” in 1946. Though the primary logo is currently a stylised “C”, Chief Wahoo has been retained as the team’s secondary emblem. Ironically, the Indians play at “Progressive Field”. MY VIEW: No contest; get rid of it. The name, tribute or not, is no longer acceptable. Not only is it factually inaccurate, it is so generic as a representation of Aboriginals as to be downright insulting. The logo worsens things exponentially, with its exaggerated display of Aboriginal stereotypes. Perhaps consultation with Aboriginal groups in the area is in order to find a new name that pays proper tribute to the region’s history (the Florida State Seminoles is one such example). If that doesn’t work, there is always the franchise’s original “Forest Citys” name to fall back upon. NBA Golden State Warriors BACKGROUND: The Warriors take their team name from the Philadelphia Warriors of the old American Basketball League. The team only lasted for two seasons, before being resurrected in 1946 for the Basketball Association of America. “Warriors” is a pretty generic name which can represent the subsections of nearly every society that defend said societies. But good gracious, that logo… Nahhh it’s okay though, that logo disappeared in 1962 and everything was fine after that. Okay, really now, third time’s the charm. OH COME ON. MY VIEW: Nothing wrong with the name. However, given the unfortunate history of the name’s representation – that of exceedingly stereotypical depictions of Aboriginals, the Warriors should think about a less-generic logo for their current uniforms to emphasise the fact that their moniker has truly moved away from its troubled past. Besides, the current logo isn’t all that exciting and would probably function better in a secondary role anyway. The NFL Kansas City Chiefs BACKGROUND: According to SB Nation blog Arrowhead Pride, former Kansas City Mayor H. Roe Bartle earned the nickname, “The Chief” on account of his work with the Aboriginal communities, and his nickname was the most-submitted entry in the contest to name the relocated Dallas Texans of the American Football League. The early logo was a stereotypical gongshow but, since 1972, it has been a simple arrowhead. Of course, arrowheads are a constant within the history of many cultures, but it isn’t Chief Wahoo so we’ll just gloss over that. MY VIEW: Oh good, they do it too! -___- Come on, Kansas City. It’s a bad tradition to begin with, but you also stole it from the Atlanta Braves…who apparently stole it from the Florida State Seminoles. Anyway. The name comes from a good place and the logo is stereotypical but pretty tame. Few problems here. Washington Redskins BACKGROUND: The Redskins were named as such due to their one-time tenancy at Boston’s Fenway Park, home of the Red Sox. However, since 1937, the team has been located in Washington, D.C., removing any legitimacy for their clearly insensitive team name. Prior to becoming the Redskins, the franchise was known as the Braves (passable) and the Eskimos (also abhorrent), so questionable names have been around since the beginning. Add to this the fact that their primary colour can be interpreted to represent stereotypical interpretations of Aboriginal skin tones and you’ve got yourself the strongest argument of the bunch for a total team branding revamp. MY VIEW: The worst of the worst. Owner Dan Snyder’s claims that the name is “a badge of honor” were debunked in 1933. The logo appears to represent no person in particular and the colour scheme is questionable at best. Blackskins, Whiteskins and Yellowskins would all be grossly inappropriate. So why is Redskins allowed to stand? The NHL Chicago Blackhawks BACKGROUND: The team is named for a World War One unit that was named after Chief Black Hawk of the Sauk Nation, who stood up for his tribe against the strong-armed tactics of the United States Government and its constant desire for expansion. The logos have remained fairly consistent over time – the primary emblem is a headshot portrait of an Aboriginal and the secondary is two tomahawks crossing over a stylised “C”. MY VIEW: So we’ve got the name of a legendary Aboriginal leader. That’s a pretty good start; I feel like, if a team really feels compelled to to utilise an Aboriginal-themed moniker, then it is good practice to choose a specific element of Aboriginal culture – whether that be a given tribe, position, role model or artefact – to draw from. The primary logo is a somewhat stereotypical, though admittedly neutral, image of an Aboriginal (The Names of the Games indicates that this portrait is a depiction of Chief Black Hawk, though Internet sources give mixed indications, with The (unofficial) NHL Uniform Database and Chris Creamer’s SportsLogos.Net both not indicating as such). The Blackhawks get a pass from me, though, should they indeed decide to change their logo, there is already a pretty solid alternative ready to go. In conclusion, I mean no offense and no harm by this article. They are simply my observations as an outside observer that is neither a fan of any of the above teams nor someone of Aboriginal descent. North American society can’t shy away from discussions about our troubled past – and present. For instance, I think we can all support the alteration of history curriculums to encompass the history of Canada and the United States as a temporal whole, rather than simply focussing on the European perspective of what happened after Europeans landed on North American shores. On the other hand, we also have to be aware of the fact that some people of Aboriginal ancestry are not bothered by this debate at all. In terms of sports, we cannot let maniacs like Dan Snyder continue doing what they’re doing. And yet, it is not prudent to just delete any and all references to Aboriginal culture from our sporting teams. If we do, where do we stop? If some people of Scandinavian descent are offended by the Minnesota Vikings, and their logo and mascot, are we going to change their name, too? No, that’s ridiculous. The vast majority of people can distinguish between the Viking propensity for ferocious warfare and the Scandinavian people as a whole. Now, if the team were named the Minnesota Whiteskins, it might be a different story. In the same way, I would imagine that most people know that the name “Braves” represents a small part of historical Aboriginal society, and is not reflective of Aboriginal people as a whole. Clearly, balance is needed. TL;DR? We should be wary of painting things with too broad a brush. At the same time, we should not refuse to acknowledge that a brush exists at all.
0 Comments
All illustrations by Andrew M. Greenstein, The unofficial NHL Uniform Database Ahhh yes, the Calgary Flames. My hometown team. My boys! The perennial feel-good, hard-working, grab-your-lunch-pail-and-work-boots-and-go-to-work team…that has also won only 4 playoff rounds since 1989, missing the playoffs altogether 13 times during that span. Well, hey, at least they don’t consistently keep trading my favourite players though, right?! I’m so happy Theo Fleury spent his entire caree–…I mean, isn’t it wonderful that Valeri Bure got to retire as a Fl–…you’ve gotta be kidding me, what about Freddie Brathwaite? ...well, SURELY Jarome Iginla won’t be trad–OH COME ON. Fuck it. At least they have nice jerseys. OH WAIT. But, for now, let’s head back to happier times, where it all began: Yes, the ‘80s. Fresh off a move from Atlanta, the Flames were kicking ass and taking names. Or, rather, providing a mild divisional annoyance to the Edmonton Oilers during the latter team’s march to 64 Cups in the decade. Nevertheless, they looked sharp doing it, with a simple, three-colour design – extracted from Lanny McDonald’s glorious moustache – that was bright enough to belong in the 1980s, yet timeless enough to be brought back as a throwback in 2009 – 20 years after their lone Stanley Cup win. However, after experiencing four first-round exits in five years – the other year being one in which they failed to qualify for the Playoffs at all, it was clear that something needed to be done. Of course, what shakes a team up more than new jerseys, amirite?! Well, to be brutally honest, it didn’t work. I feel like trading away superstar – and Stanley Cup winning goal-scorer – Doug Gilmour for…well, not Doug Gilmour might also have had something to do with that. The Flames would not win a Playoff round until 2004 – wearing another kit, I might add. However, this 1994 effort at redesigning the Home and Away uniforms – which were joined by a black Alternate kit in 1998 – wasn’t too shabby, especially considering some of the garbage being spewed out by other teams of the era. The addition of black was done tastefully to the Home and Away jerseys, and the diagonal platform that the logo rests upon – along with corresponding trim on the jersey sleeves and pants – is interesting and breaks up what would otherwise be a pretty, yet dull, concoction. The black, “Flaming Horse” jersey took a lot of heat (see what I did there?!), especially when they usurped the red jerseys as Calgary’s Away uniforms in the next redesign, but I didn’t mind it – Calgary IS the “Stampede City”, after all – though the white fill for the numbers and font probably should have been red. At the very least, the logo was well-suited to the secondary status it enjoyed in the next iteration of the Flames’ duds. One final point is the fact that, in one of the best uniform-related decisions in NHL history, the Flames Alternate Captains, instead of the traditional “A” on their jerseys, had the stylised “A” logo of Calgary’s predecessors, the Atlanta Flames, on their chests. How cool is that! They even briefly tried their primary logo as the patch for the Captain, but that change did not last. The white jersey you see above was introduced to start the 2000-01 season, while the red one was added in 2003 – when the NHL switched back to having dark-coloured Home and light-coloured Away jerseys. Both follow the template of the “Flaming Horse” jersey, with said logo relegated to secondary status on the shoulder. As neat as it is, the Flames’ actual logo is dope. Why they didn’t just put their primary logo on the black jersey is beyond me. But I digress. The black crest on the red jersey was a first for the team and still looks phenomenal today. Not that the white Flaming C was bad, but the black just looks a little bit more menacing. Plus, they went to Game Seven of the Stanley Cup Final with these jerseys (although they probably should have been awarded the Cup in Game Six. Here’s a video of it. Not that I’m bitter or anything.) They even added a lace-up neck! Ticks all my boxes, this one. Which brings us to the present day. Oh…oh dear. Introduced for the 2007-08 season, the Reebok Edge uniform system, with its unfinished sleeve striping, emphasis on vertical patterns over the horizontal, and weird fixation on figure-hugging vertical piping made a mockery of many a beautiful jersey. And then there was the scandal where Reebok flat-out forgot to design the Maple Leafs a uniform at all, leaving them with nothing to wear but practice jerseys.
But perhaps no team was so dearly affected by this mass redesign than the Calgary Flames. Weird, incomplete sleeve stripes. Weird, incomplete underarm stripes. Weird, incomplete piping that leads to nowhere, A weird, horizontal tail stripe that intersects with the vertical underarm striping like it was designed in Microsoft Paint. Et la pièce de résistance? The flag of Alberta on one shoulder, with the flag of Canada on the other. Just in case you forgot where Calgary was. At least the Canadian flag blends in; the Alberta flag’s blue background contrasts completely with the team’s colour scheme. It looks like one of those crafts from elementary school that you had to make by sticking bits of recycling together. In 2013, the dumpster fire burned on with the introduction of a new Alternate kit, seen in the middle of the above image. A tiny collegiate-like script, complimented by a tiny Flames logo is the primary crest. The secondary logo is too complicated for its own good, not to mention the fact that the “F” of the “CF” mark points directly into the ground. Logos are supposed to be something that a kid can draw in school. Not that have to be explained to them by their parents. Perhaps even more bizarrely, the round secondary logo and the curvy, rounded primary crest(s?) contrast sharply with the squared-off shoulder yokes, and squared-off, incomplete striping. What a mess. Other than the brief blip in 2004, following this team has been one disappointment after another. Yes, yes, there was the Spring of 2015. But, in our heart of hearts, we Flames fans knew that our team was playing way above its heads – not to mention way above the Law of Averages. That said, after many years in the wilderness, the Flames appear to finally be on the rebound. Now we we wait for the day that they get a jersey that we can wear in public without being arrested for indecent exposure. Let’s face it: 14 of the 30 National Hockey League teams don’t make the Stanley Cup Playoffs. So it’s not unlikely that you’re sitting at home, trying to figure out which postseason team is worthy of your support. Perhaps I can help:
Anaheim Ducks Why They Could Win Ryan Getzlaf and Corey Perry up front, a balanced D and two good goaltenders. Why You Should Cheer for Them Let’s call it like it is: the Ducks, though a favourite, are not a likeable hockey team. Between Perry, Getzlaf and Ryan Kesler, they’ve become the new Vancouver Canucks. Thus, if not for them, cheer for Bruce Boudreau. The man deserves it. Just pray the series doesn’t go seven. Chicago Blackhawks Why They Could Win Three Cups in the past six seasons tend to make you a favourite. Artemi Panarin replaces Patrick Sharp, and the defence core has been bolstered. So, basically, the Blackhawks are up a de-Winnipegged Andrew Ladd. Why You Should Cheer for Them Joel Quenneville is one of the most entertaining coaches in the game. Whether he is grabbing his crotch or kicking a towel, can you honestly say you’re not looking forward to another Spring of Coach Q? Dallas Stars Why They Could Win A high-octane offence led by Jamie Benn, Tyler Seguin and Jason Spezza propelled the Stars to a second-place overall finish in the NHL, not to mention the division title in the Central, the league’s toughest. Why You Should Cheer for Them For perhaps the first time since the 2005-06 and 2006-07 Buffalo Sabres – also coached by Lindy Ruff, the NHL has a legitimate contender that plays a run-and-gun style. The Stars are a real fun team to watch, and it will be great watching them shove their style of play down the throats of the “Defence wins hockey games” crowd. Detroit Red Wings Why They Could Win Darren Helm, Dylan Larkin and Andreas Athanasiou, among others, land Detroit amongst the fastest teams in the NHL. Their older veterans that might have lost a step – Datsyuk, Zetterberg, Richards… – are proven winners that can still play. Why You Should Cheer for Them For those of you living under rocks, Pavel Datsyuk might not be back in the NHL after this season. I, for one, want to see as much Magic Man – one of the best, if not THE best, two-way players this game has ever seen – as possible. Florida Panthers Why They Could Win Florida has three lines that score a bunch and two goaltenders who have had outstanding seasons. “Yeah but their possession num–“ Shut up, ride the wave. Why You Should Cheer for Them Because it would be hilarious for everyone outside of British Columbia if Roberto Luongo wins himself a ring. Also, Jaromir Jagr winning a Stanley Cup 24 years after his last one? Amazing. Los Angeles Kings Why They Could Win They’re the Kings. They possess the puck better than any other team – first in Corsi Close, by a significant margin, this season. They’ve won two of the past four Stanley Cups. After missing the Playoffs last year, one would imagine they will be chomping at the bit for a third title, especially considering their rivals, the aforementioned Blackhawks, just won their third Cup in six years. Why You Should Cheer for Them Is there anybody out there who doesn’t want two solid months of Darryl Sutter? Minnesota Wild Why They Could Win If they play to their potential, the Wild can run with anyone in the league. First Round upsets of division winners St. Louis and Colorado the past two years is evidence of this. Why You Should Cheer for Them A Devan Dubnyk Stanley Cup? LOL Oilers. Nashville Predators Why They Could Win After years of having to play a stifling defensive system to survive, Nashville finally has a couple of competent scoring lines to complement their vaunted back end. If Pekka Rinne can remember how to play goal, the Preds are in business. Why You Should Cheer for Them A hugely passionate fanbase has seen a chronic lack of playoff hockey during the Predators’ first 16 seasons, with the team never making it out of the second round. Also, nothing says championship like golden buckets. New York Islanders Why They Could Win The Islanders are a rambunctious team that underperformed during the regular season, scraping into the Playoffs in a Wild Card spot. If they can turn it on at the right time, look out for the Islanders. Captain John Tavares enters the postseason thoroughly en fuego. Why You Should Cheer for Them Of all of the fanbases in the league, this one might be the most deserving of a break. No Playoff series wins since ’93. The new arena is an hour away from the old one. Even if you manage to make it there, you could be one of the literally thousands of paying fans that can’t see half the damn ice. Shut up, here’s a scarf, go Nets. New York Rangers Why They Could Win A team with oodles of Playoff experience only got experiencier with the addition of Eric Staal. Plus, any team with Henrik Lundqvist has a chance to take it all. Why You Should Cheer for Them Lundqvist deserves a ring for bailing out the Rangers game after game, season after season. He ‘aint gettin’ any younger, either. Philadelphia Flyers Why They Could Win The Flyers were one of the hottest teams closing out the regular season. They have some good structure thanks to first-year Head Coach Dave Hakstol, and their goaltending situation has been solidified by the tandem of Steven Mason and Michal Neuvirth. Why You Should Cheer for Them The Flyers have a variety of intriguing storylines: Flyers co-founder and longtime owner Ed Snider passed away earlier this week. Dave Hakstol is a rookie coach coming out of the collegiate ranks. The Flyers made a heroic run to secure a Playoff spot. And don’t forget the Ghost Bear! Pick one. Pittsburgh Penguins Why They Could Win After losing their first 4 games under replacement Head Coach Mike Sullivan, the Penguins won 32 of their remaining 50 games. Sidney Crosby (8-game point streak) and Phil Kessel (12 points in his last 9 games) come into the Playoffs red hot. Why You Should Cheer for Them Due to injuries, postseason meltdowns and a healthy dose of bad luck, Penguins fans have been robbed of additional Stanley Cups after winning in 2009. Sidney Crosby and Evgeni Malkin are generational talents – with Marc-André Fleury not far behind – that any hockey fan would be blessed to watch play for – and win – Lord Stanley’s Mug once more. San Jose Sharks Why They Could Win The Sharks are sixth in the NHL in Corsi Close and possess a balanced attack, two good goaltenders and a Wookiee on defence. Why You Should Cheer for Them Yes, yes, the Sharks have let us down in the past. Several times. But are there two guys that deserve a Cup more than Joe Thornton and James Reimer? What better time to shake off the monkey? St. Louis Blues Why They Could Win The St. Louis Blues won the Central Division. They’ve had a Cup-contending team for the past few years and goaltender Brian Elliott comes in having posted some spectacular numbers to close out the regular season campaign (we’ll gloss over his getting pulled in the Blues’ season finale). Why You Should Cheer for Them The aforementioned Elliott is set to start for the Blues in Game One. Despite having consistently posted good numbers during regular seasons for St. Louis, the Blues have consistently supplanted him with a different starter for the Playoffs (Jaroslav Halák, Ryan Miller, Jake Allen…). It appears Elliott has the ball in his court. Here’s hoping it stays that way. Tampa Bay Lightning Why They Could Win Last year’s Cup finalists enter the Playoffs with significant injury problems, but goaltender Ben Bishop had another sterling season and Tampa’s team is deep and, now, experienced. Assuming they stay in the hunt that long, their lineup will only improve as the injured players return. Why You Should Cheer for Them The Lightning’s quest for the Cup last year was hampered by significant injuries to Ben Bishop and Tyler Johnson. It would be awesome to see what they can do when they – eventually – have a full lineup. Washington Capitals Why They Could Win Excellent goaltending, a solid defence core and a potent, multifaceted attack. Oh, and they won the President’s Trophy. What’s not to like? Why You Should Cheer for Them What, you mean a RUSSIAN player can captain a Stanley Cup-winning team? What kind of a sick, twisted world are we living in?! Happy Playoffs, everybody!! There has been much talk recently regarding the possibility of increasing the age of eligibility for the National Hockey League Entry Draft to 19.
At first glance, this idea just seems like another manifestation of the NHL’s compulsive desire to fiddle. “Let’s make the net bigger”. “Let’s make the crease smaller”. “Let’s switch around the divisions”. “Let’s ruin the World Cup format with Team Some-of-Europe and Team Young-Guns-But-Only-If-You-Are-23-And-Under-And-Not-Some-Foreign-Guy”. Seriously though: has the league ever thought of just leaving things alone? Even just for a while? The three main reasons for this proposed change are the notions that general managers and their scouting staffs would have a larger body of work from which to make decisions come draft day, that it would increase the level of competitive play at the junior (and collegiate, for that matter) levels, and that NHL teams would have to pay their players for one fewer year. First of all, NHL draft rules state that any North American player between the ages of 18 and 20 can be selected, along with any European player who has not yet entered the NHL. Therefore, there is already a large window of opportunity for NHL teams to identify late bloomers and hidden gems. It is down to their front offices to identify the best possible players, whether they be 18 or 19, 28 or 29, 38 or 39. Do your jobs, or get someone who can. Secondly, I understand the desire to maintain good-quality hockey at the developmental level, but, dear NHL, I would absolutely LOVE to know how you are going to go and tell someone like Sidney Crosby or Connor McDavid or Jack Eichel that, as legal adults, they can’t play in your league. What more are these supernaturally-talented players going to learn in another year of junior or collegiate hockey? What if sending them back actually stunts their development? And, pray tell, what happens when junior-age players start flocking to the European leagues, à la Auston Matthews – or the KHL? Even worse, with the latter league’s ability to (mostly) pay its players comparable salaries to those of the NHL, what would be the incentive to come back? What happens if the next McDavid plays his entire career for HC Sibir Novosibirsk? You want good quality developmental hockey? Let 18 year-olds into the AHL! (for the uninitiated, the minimum age to play in the American Hockey League after having been drafted out of Canadian Major Junior is 20) Oh, to be fair, there have been various compromises floated, such as allowing 18 year-olds to be drafted, but only in the First Round. This suggestion is equally ridiculous; how much difference is there, really, between players at picks 30 and 31 of a draft? Come on, now. The NHL struggles to gain traction in many non-traditional hockey markets. Making things more complicated and inherently inconsistent does nothing to garner new fans, and just confuses and or infuriates the ones the league already has. It is really getting embarrassing for hockey fans to admit that they follow the NHL. As for junior hockey, the Canadian Hockey League is already plenty competitive. Yes, it can, at times and in certain areas, struggle to get people to care. But that isn’t the fault of a lack of talent. I feel like making some simple changes, such as altering the format of the Memorial Cup to something resembling March Madness (idea courtesy Jeff Marek on the Marek vs. Wyshynski podcast) would go a long way towards growing interest in the often-undersupported CHL. Drafting is inherently risky. Has this guy who has succeeded in Major Junior already reached his ceiling? What if he becomes complacent after being hyped so much at such a young age? Will that kid who has committed to college flunk out in his first semester? However, the same argument can be made for most things in life. “If I take money out of this bank machine, what if someone comes up behind me and steals it?” “If I pick Anaheim in the Playoffs, what if they have to play a Game Seven?” Raising the draft age to benefit NHL teams is akin to saying to the government, “Nahh, give me another year to pay my taxes. I just feel like I would be able to do a better job if you gave me another year. Oh and I’m also not going to pay you for that extra year.” Certainly, this may be ideal. But this is also not how the world works. You sit down, fill out the needlessly complicated forms, send them in and hope for the best. Most years, you get a tax return. Sometimes, you get audited. Sometimes, you get thrown in jail. That’s just the way life works. If NHL teams aren’t happy with the players they have selected, the Entry-Level Contract stipulations give them an easy out. Or, they can always do what the Leafs did this past offseason and fire almost their entire scouting staff. After all, if some NHL coaches and general managers haven’t embraced analytics, it stands to reason that their scouts haven’t, either. Who knows, maybe some teams still have a cadre of crusty, narrow-minded employees who like a guy with a “good stick”, who is “hard on the puck” and who scores well on the “eye test”. But I digress. Put simply, to those advocating for an increased draft age: stop whining and accept the fact that nothing in this world is a certainty. And please, PLEASE, stop your incessant fiddling with our game. On a Friday night early last season in Columbus, Ohio, the Canadian television feed of the Leafs-Blue Jackets game zoomed in on a heated discussion between Jared Boll and Dion Phaneuf. As they neared their respective benches, rinkside microphones picked up the following comment from Boll: “Nobody likes you”. That got me thinking: how had Dion Phaneuf fallen so far out of favour? A big, tough, Canadian kid from the Prairies who could hit, shoot and fight, all while being reasonably mobile. If you can find me a more stereotypical (NHL) hockey player, please let me know. So how did a guy with his genetic gifts and skillset, who burst onto the National Hockey League scene with 54 goals in his first three seasons from the back end, and who, according to both Hockey-Reference.com and war-on-ice.com consistently drove possession, become so scorned? Last week’s trade to the Ottawa Senators ended his often-tumultuous stay in Toronto, so let’s have a bit of a post-mortem, shall we? Dion Phaneuf broke in with the Calgary Flames in 2005-06 as a rookie defenceman and promptly put up 20 goals, including 16 on the Power Play. He followed this up with two seasons of 17 goals, and, at the end of 2008-09, his fourth NHL season, had accumulated 65 Goals and 206 Points – first and sixth, respectively, amongst NHL defencemen during that timespan. These impressive offensive numbers were complimented by his reputation for laying bone-crushing hits – that were usually squeaky-clean, I might add. He was submerged deep within a strong Flames defence core which included stalwart, if unspectacular, veterans such as Roman Hamrlík, Robyn Regehr, Cory Sarich and Rhett Warrener, all of whom excelled on the defensive side of the puck. Combine this with the backing of all-world goaltender Mikka Kiprusoff and Dion Phaneuf had full licence to search and destroy, both on the scoresheet and in open ice. Midway through another solid season in 2009-10 season, Phaneuf was dispatched to the Toronto Maple Leafs, who sold him to fans and media alike as a young, defensive stud who would be THE guy on the blueline of the Blue and White for years to come. A mere four months after his arrival, he was named Team Captain, in June of 2010. However, his arrival in Toronto – a infamously tough media market, along with his status as the Number One defenceman AND Captain for one of the most storied hockey franchises the world has ever seen changed Phaneuf – and not for the better. His game was tamer, more conservative. Ron Wilson’s nonsensical requirement that his defencemen keep two hands on their stick (seriously, it was a thing. Look it up.) did not help matters, but clearly, something was amiss. Did he receive pressure from his coach, or perhaps from on high, to tone down his exuberance and play a more responsible game? Did he alter his style of play to ingratiate himself to the notoriously savage Toronto media? Maybe he himself felt that, finally being out of the shadow of his mentors in Calgary and being Toronto’s Captain meant his game had to mature. Only he knows. What I do know is this: his goal-scoring and point production decreased, due in large part to the fact that his once-surgically accurate slapshot began to have trouble splitting the uprights on a football field. His possession numbers for his time in Toronto were brutal. Game-changing hits and end-to-end rushes became few and far between. Having lost the “high-reward” aspects of his play, Phaneuf became merely a “high-risk” player, with defensive coverage that often approached that of the Cheshire Cat. (GIF retrieved from: http://cheshiretime.tumblr.com/post/22138162629/alice-i-dont-want-to-meet-mad-people-cheshire) I argue that this taming of his game exposed Dion Phaneuf for what he is: a good NHL defenceman, comfortable slotting in anywhere from Number Two through Number Four in your rotation. Not, alas, a Number One. I believe that removing the unpredictability from his game actually made Phaneuf a worse player. Opposing wingers once had second thoughts about streaking through the neutral zone, as they knew Phaneuf might just take a chance and step up on them. Now, they had licence to put their heads down and turnstyle him mercilessly. Agitators felt they could push him around because, they knew that he, as the captain, couldn’t risk taking a bad penalty by responding physically. The rollicking, almost improvised style of play that had made Phaneuf a fan-favourite in Calgary – and across the NHL – was also the very thing that once made him so very effective as an NHL defenceman. And it had been beaten out of him, certainly in Toronto, if not also towards the end of his tenure in Calgary.
And you know what? Absolutely none of this is the fault of Dion Phaneuf. He didn’t ask to be traded to Toronto. He didn’t ask to be the Leafs’ Number One defenceman. He didn’t ask to be captain. He didn’t ask to not receive a half-decent supporting cast. And he didn’t offer himself a contract that pays him $7 million per season. Dion Phaneuf is an inherently erratic player. It’s just who he is. He can shoot the puck a million kilometres per hour. He can crush you in open ice or along the boards – take your pick. He can play the Power Play and the Penalty Kill. And for goodness’ sake, don’t fight him; he is one scary dude. His jumping up in the play and stepping up for the big hit can leave fans of his team a little clenched, for sure. However, he is a much more valuable player when the opposing team doesn’t know what the heck he is going to do next. I really hope that Dion Phaneuf, removed from the incredible pressures put on him in Toronto is unleashed in Ottawa and can return to fulfilling his potential. Teach him to pick his spots, sure. But do your best to rekindle some of that old fire. All illustrations by Andrew M. Greenstein, The unofficial NHL Uniform Database And now for one that pains me a little. Buffalo is truly the city that just cannot, for the life of them, catch a break. The NFL’s Buffalo Bills made the Super Bowl four consecutive years (1991 through 1994)…and lost each and every one of them. Backstopped by arguably the best goaltender of all time in Dominik Hašek, the Buffalo Sabres had great success in the late ‘90s and early 2000s…but were done in by Brett Hull’s then-illegal Stanley Cup winner and the National Hockey League War Room forgetting that goals are not allowed to count when pucks are shot through the side of the net. The Sabres of 2006 were done in by the idiotic puck-over-the-glass rule, with poor Brian Campbell taking a Delay of Game penalty late in Game Seven of the Eastern Conference Finals, providing the Hurricanes with the powerplay which they used to score the series-winning goal. Then they saw stars like Daniel Brière, Chris Drury, Derek Roy and Ryan Miller all leave town, before losing the 2015 NHL Draft Lottery, despite having the worst overall record. Unfortunately for Sabres players, they also haven’t exactly been provided with the nicest of wearables… It all started off so well! From their introduction to the NHL in 1970 until the mid-‘90s, the Sabres wore variations of the above uniform. The royal blue and gold colour scheme is timeless, the logo and striping are simple yet interesting, and the lace-up collar – which, sadly, was replaced by a v-neck – is nearly always a good decision. What could possibly go wrong? Even the 1996 redesign (which consisted of the black and white kits above; the red came a few years later) was pretty great. It gets a lot of flack for some reason, perhaps because it replaced such a classic set. However, given all of the garbage hanging in NHL locker room stalls during the ‘90s, the Sabres’ stab at modernisation turned out really well. Sharp, angled stripes on the jersey, along with the introduction of a secondary logo on the shoulder, make it pretty clear that the Sabres are indeed named after a pretty serious weapon. The central logo, a buffalo’s head, symbolises their fair city – or at least its name (I will confess, though: I had a poster of Hašek in my bedroom throughout my childhood. It was only in my early 20s that I realised that the mouth of the buffalo was on the right, and not the left). The late-coming third kit, including the red, “dinner plate” jerseys – that say “BUFFALO” on the waist striping, just in case you forgot who was playing and decided to check out some crotches to find out – were an ill-advised departure from the formula, to be sure. But, overall, these very-‘90s uniforms were – and still are – thoroughly enjoyable. One of the few attempts at modernisation that resulted in success. Enter the Buffaslug. Oh…oh dear. A tiny, limbless, possibly demonic – check out those red eyes – buffalo flanked by a drab colour scheme – since when does the colour grey brighten up anyone’s day? – and psychedelic striping. Thankfully, the team threw their fans a bone with a throwback third jersey…which they promptly removed from their wardrobe the following season. The Buffaslug jersey is truly one of the most revolting articles of clothing the world has ever known. The following two kits followed the Buffaslug, with the Home and Away kits enduring to the present day. I included them purely to bring to the attention of the world that the middle jersey in each picture was actually worn by a professional hockey team, by players making millions of dollars. The first one puts some neat striping and accent variations on the Sabres’ original uniform sets…before making the logo the size of a dime and writing “BUFFALO” across the front in what looks like WordArt. I’m not a fan of script logos in general – why tell your fans what they already know? – but they are especially tacky when they dwarf the team’s original logo on the team’s original(-ish) backdrop. Yes, I know the script logo paid homage to the AHL’s Buffalo Bisons of the mid-20th Century, but did it really have to be front and centre? Why not pop it on the shoulder? The yellow nameplates contrast well with the royal blue of the jerseys, and the quilted numbers are kinda neat. I might even be able to get used to the 2 x 2 striping on the jerseys and socks. But the logo just ruins it for me. And the second one… Well, the Sabres’ own President, Ted Black, publicly stated after it was released that it might just be a “turd burger”. It looks like one of those paint-by-numbers pictures gone horribly awry, like someone whose friends have drawn on him/her after he/she passed out at a party. Millions of television sets found themselves prematurely discarded after hockey fans couldn’t understand why there was so much grey on their screens. Looking at it from the front (yellow) and back (blue), one would be hard-pressed to identify it as the same jersey. It looks like the wearing has donned a cape and is about to fly off into the night, perhaps to fight all of the Canadians coming across the border to clean out Buffalo’s malls. Oh but hey now, it’s not all bad: it says “BUFFALO” in tiny letters on the front. Just in case you forgot. I mean, how thoughtful is that?! Which brings us to the present day. The Home kit was first introduced during the Buffaslug era as an alternate uniform. In 2010, it became their official Home uniform, while a white variation was added for the Away. The overall design is similar to that of their inaugural season, albeit with thicker striping on the jerseys and simplified striping on the socks – one batch of three stripes, instead of a Leafs-esque 3 x 3. The Sabres have chosen to stick with Reebok Edge ideals with the addition of “silver” (grey?) vertical piping on the sweaters. That said, this design choice is innocuous enough not to ruin the jerseys altogether. Equally odd are the player numbers on the top-left of the jersey (or the top-right if you’re wearing one right now). A holdover from the Buffaslug days, they break up the cleanliness of the look, though they are not particularly offensive to the eye.
The colour scheme retains the gold of the originals, but shifts from royal blue to navy. NHL teams have, generally, a pretty brutal history of creating dark-themed jerseys (Dallas, anyone? How about Anaheim? Buffalo, however, has pulled this one off rather nicely. The gold accents are bright and bold enough to offset the darkening, though a vertical gold stripe on the pants – and perhaps a gold shoulder outline on the Home jerseys, such as the accenting on Carolina’s old duds – would be welcome. Overall though, it is a pretty simple, relatively clean design. No shoulder logo? No problem. Buffalo has really done right by their fans and oh wait what was that… For the love of all things good and pure, STOP WITH THE GREY. And you put it under the arms (and neck), to boot! Now it just looks like your players are sweating all over the joint. Maybe that’s why your team doesn’t score, none of your players want to raise their arms! Since when does grey ever make anything better?! Sabres fans… I’m sorry. I’m just so sorry. As the National Hockey League Trade Deadline approaches, the eyes of the hockey world once again fixate upon the general managers of the league’s 30 teams. “Will this guy be traded?” “Will that guy re-sign?” “Will he accept a rental deal?” These are the questions fans and commentators alike have begun churning out, given the flurry of activity in the past couple of weeks, most notably Seth Jones and Ryan Johansen swapping cities, and Luke Schenn and Vincent Lecavalier going to the Kings.
Inevitably, GMs will be dichotomously divided into the categories of “geniuses” and “idiots”, the breakdown of which shall occupy everyone’s time until the Playoffs actually begin. But should we really be so hard on general managers? Would you REALLY want their job? Okay, yes, they make a lot of money and have – ideally – significant control over a National Hockey League team, entities worth hundreds of millions – if not billions – of dollars. It’s not near as simple as it looks, though; I argue that GMs are truly a unique breed. Last season, I signed up for a Fantasy Hockey league with a group of my friends. Pick a bunch of players and track them through the season, all in an effort to beat everyone else in various statistical categories. Simple, right? At the draft auction, I spent my biggest chunk of change on Henrik Lundqvist. Perennial Vezina candidate, good team – albeit not possession-wise (seriously, check out the Rangers’ possession numbers for the past 2 years), very durable… I should be set in goal, right? Well, a puck to the throat changed that. And then my backup, Steve Mason – who has very quietly been posting some real solid numbers the past couple of years in Philadelphia – went down, as well. Gahhh. What to do?! Do I look at the Free Agent pool? Do I make a deal? Do I bring my goalie coach out of retirement? I ended up trading for Brian Elliott, who had a rough end to the season, ultimately ceding the starter’s role to Jake Allen. I was so desperate for a goalie though, I was willing to give up Patric Hörnqvist and Kris Letang. Now, in hindsight, that was, obviously, an awful deal. But hey, the pressure to win was on, and I did what I thought was best. I had a need, and I addressed it. Granted, it blew up in my face. Didn’t I do what a good GM is supposed to do, though? “Yeah, but fantasy sports aren’t real sports”, you’re probably saying to yourself. “You’re an idiot!” might come to mind, as well. And you’d be right, on both counts. But how is Marc Bergevin, for example, feeling right about now? The one-time division-leading Canadiens are plummeting in the standings, having lost all-world Carey Price to injury a couple of months back. They can’t score and they can’t keep the puck out of their net to the same degree: not a recipe for success. Should they make a move for a goalie? Well, you’re not going to find a goalie anywhere near the calibre of Carey Price (sorry, Ben Scrivens) for an affordable price, and a trade for a top-tier ‘tender would likely eliminate a strength to address a weakness. Maybe the Canadiens’ skaters weren’t quite as good as projected, so perhaps some more offence is in order. But what would you need to give up for that? Or, as Montréal fans have been screaming about for years, maybe the coaching style is the problem. But do you really want to change horses in the middle of the stream? Especially when you are still – barely – in Playoff contention? Beyond the explicit statistics and team performance, there are innumerable less-obvious, yet critically important, things to consider – most of which are mercifully absent from Fantasy Hockey. "Will I have a job next season if I don’t make this trade?" "Will I have a job next season if I do?" "Why is the other GM willing to do this?" "Will the player we agree to come here?" "What’s his personal situation like?" "Will he re-sign with us next season?" "Will he fit in nicely in the dressing room?" "Can we use him properly? "How will this affect the team in the coming years?" "What will my legacy be?" Every year, some general managers cave in to their worst instincts, at the Trade Deadline or otherwise. Remember when the Thrashers traded away young stud Braydon Coburn for greybeard Alexei Zhitnik? That said, GMs have to feel comfortable walking into their dressing room, looking each player in the eye and saying, “I’ve done all I possibly can to help you”. They have to be comfortable at a podium, telling the media that, “Yeah, we have a real chance this year!” They have to be comfortable telling ownership, “I’ve given us the best chance to win”. They have to be comfortable with going home to their families and friends, who have no doubt been inundated with opinions galore. And they have to be comfortable looking themselves in the mirror and saying, “I’ve done the best job possible”. That’s one hell of a tough job. Are we really right to criticise? Well, yes. We are the fans who invest the time, energy and money to keep our teams going. Just be thankful you don’t have their job. Buckle up, folks; February 29th is coming faster than you think. The modern hockey world is home to countless analysts and pundits who peddle their knowledge and influence to fans of our fair game. Others – myself included – comment on hockey happenings from an unofficial, non-expert position, providing – hopefully – additional insights to compliment those emanating from official channels. However, even in this endlessly connected world with innumerable critics and constant analysis, there is one element of the game that neither fans, nor bloggers, nor experts have ever really been able to figure out: goaltending.
Think about it: outside of the top five or ten goaltenders in the league, can anyone really claim to know which goalies will be successful in a given year? What on Earth happened to Vezina finalists Ilya Bryzgalov and Niklas Backstrom? Why don’t durable stalwarts Roberto Luongo and Marc-André Fleury get the credit they deserve? And can someone please explain the remarkable resurgence of Devan Dubnyk? People tend to judge goalies based on the ‘tenders they played with and or grew up watching. I remember specifically two instances during my (House League) career that illustrate this point: I had a parent of another kid on my team tell me that I needed to “stand up more” so that I could “be ready for high shots” – nevermind how most goals go in the lower half of the net, he grew up watching Johnny Bower, dammit! Another year, I had a coach at the tryouts pushing down on my shoulders to see how close I could come to a full split because, of course, groin flexibility is the most important criteria for judging a 11 year-old’s goaltending ability – someone clearly needed to take away his Dominik Hašek tapes. Analysts, be they former professional goaltenders, players or otherwise, are generally no better. Nearly every goal is followed by some explanation of how the goaltender should have, somehow, had that puck. How about giving credit to the shooter for hitting their spot? Or blaming the team for a defensive breakdown? Even when the goaltender does stop the puck, commentary often takes the tone of, “and the shooter just couldn’t get the puck up over the pad”, totally dismissing a fine bit of goaltending. Obviously, analysts they have a requirement to project their admittedly extensive knowledge and experience. Thus, they are quick to explain everything in simple, black and white terms. “He goes down too early”. “He cheats on plays”. “He needs to come out and challenge”. And you know what? That commentary might well be fair enough if modern goalies were constantly turning around to dig pucks out of their net. But, judging by the fact we have had the NHL’s “lack” of goal-scoring shoved down our throats, lo these many years, that is clearly not the case. In my view, the constant criticism and deconstruction NHL goaltenders are subjected to is, for the most part, unwarranted. Every profession has people who are successful. Each person who becomes successful does so in their own unique way. Therefore, perhaps analysts who are former goaltenders have a bias towards the sort of style they themselves employed, and perhaps those who are former players have a bias towards the sort of style they witnessed their teammates playing. Therefore, the second a goal goes in on a goaltender who is not playing a style of which they approve, many analysts pounce. That said, as mentioned before, goaltending is complicated to analyse and predict, so is it really right to blame those tasked with critiquing goaltenders to sticking to what they know? The same can be said for the fans; fans are accustomed to watching goal be tended in very specific ways – is it really fair to blame them for being apprehensive about an unorthodox style? After all, who among us doesn’t get a bit clenched watching James Reimer or Jonathan Quick between the pipes? As a Greater Toronto resident, I am more than familiar with how this phenomenon can extend even to goalie coaches. Take François Allaire, for example. He is undoubtedly a smart and talented individual, having won Stanley Cups in 1986 and 1993 (mentoring Montréal’s Patrick Roy, who won the Conn Smythe trophy on each occasion), and adding a third in 2007 tutoring Anaheim’s Jean-Sébastien Giguère (whom he also coached to a Conn Smythe win in 2003, despite the Mighty Ducks losing in the Final). However, his insistence on strict adherence to a conservative, Butterfly-dominated style of goaltending, despite meshing well with the builds and skillsets of Roy and Giguère, severely handicapped the careers of Leafs Vesa Toskala, Jonas Gustavsson and James Reimer during his tenure in Toronto (2009-12). These three goalies had established themselves as lively, athletic puckstoppers, and so a switch to this much more conservative brand of goaltending was, ultimately, disastrous. Toskala has long since retired, and Gustavsson and Reimer have only recently begun to show flashes of their former brilliance. With any other facet of hockey – any other industry, for that matter, people ask “if”, not “how”. Can you imagine if a goal-scorer was criticised for scoring too many bang-in goals? Or if a Centre was criticised for winning too many faceoffs with his feet? No? Exactly. And yet Dominik Hašek, with 6 Vezina Trophies to his name, is often deemed to have been “lucky”. Henrik Lundqvist, Olympic Gold Medal and Vezina Trophy notwithstanding, is chastised for playing too far back in his net. Corey Crawford, with 2 Stanley Cups to his name, is still considered a second-tier starter with a weak glove hand. My point is this: leave goalies alone. They have a tough enough job already. Nobody really understands goaltending, not even goalies. It just sort of…is. The job description is pretty simple: prevent the puck from entering the net. However, there are infinite ways to execute said task, and we all need to become comfortable with that fact. Perhaps not all roads lead to Rome, but it is very rare that a goalie and or said goalie’s style of play is solely responsible for a team’s struggles. Barring that situation, let them be. All illustrations by Andrew M. Greenstein, The unofficial NHL Uniform Database …except the Winter Classic one. That one is an image from the Canadiens’ website. Having watched the Canadiens play the Bruins outdoors on New Year’s Day, and seeing as how I did the Boston Bruins last week, I thought it only fitting to write up Montréal’s team kit to complete the Winter Classic experience. The basic Home and Away kits for the Canadiens (see below – and above, for that matter) are, quite simply, as good as they get in the National Hockey League. For years, I struggled to pick between the Canadiens and the Chicago Blackhawks for the superior team uniform. However, this past summer, the Canadiens’ decision to replace the standard, V-Neck jersey collar with one of the lace-up variety – not to mention their gallicisation of the NHL shield – pushed it firmly into the top spot, for my money. Lace-up collars, especially for teams with as storied a past as the Canadiens, just make everything better. Take note, Chi-Town. Yes, the colours and their combination are simple and not uncommon. And yes, the general design has been consistent for so long that it was pretty much predestined to become a classic anyway. However, two elements that really boost this uniform to legendary status are its logo and its striping. The logo is the famous elongated “C”, which is braced from within by an “H”, signifying Le Club de Hockey Canadien. And it looks brilliant. The striping is very unusual for a hockey sweater: on the Home jersey, a chunky thin-thick-thin combination wraps around the chest – unique among the current crop of NHL sweaters – with corresponding sleeve and sock accompaniments. A nice two-colour trim piece on the tail rounds out one of the most familiar jerseys in sports. And it looks brilliant. For the Road jersey, the two-colour tail striping carries over from the Home, with socks to match. Red cuffs and shoulder yokes fill in the perimeter of the Away jersey, rounding out another simple, recognisable creation. And it looks brilliant. My only real quibbles are with the separation between the numbers and their outlines on the Road jerseys, the lack of outlining on the player names, and the miniscule lettering for the captains. However, these are but petty trivialities. With the exception of a couple of tweaks to the logo, font and positioning of various elements, the Canadiens’ uniforms have remained largely the same since their first season in the National Hockey League, 1917-18. However, between 1909 and 1917, the Canadiens went through several uniform iterations. In 2008-09 (see left, below) and 2009-10 (see right, below), Montréal paid homage to some of these designs for the celebrations of their centennial year, along with, at the top left, the short-lived, yet sharp-looking, mid-1940s redesign of their white jerseys. For a team that spent the first years of its existence searching for an identity – at least visually, it is admirable that the Canadiens have managed to stay consistent – and consistently brilliant – with their uniforms. Thus, the final, and perhaps most significant, element of their phenomenal kit is its longevity. The Canadiens’ uniforms have been as consistent and comforting as Tomas Plekanec’s turtleneck. The 2016 Winter Classic edition (see below) does not stray too far from the script. I love the vintage collar, bringing things back to the days when hockey sweaters were just that, woolen sweaters. The font is a little goofy and the sleeve numbers were clearly positioned by someone in need of an optometrist, but neither of these things prove disastrous to the product as a whole. The base harkens back to the aforementioned mid-1940s redesign of the white jerseys – which were really just the reverse of the reds from the time period (both are shown below), with slightly paler blue and red colouring. The central, white logo is straight off of the jerseys from the next image, which were worn from 1922 until 1924 – the first year the Canadiens won the Stanley Cup. The sleeve striping of the Winter Classic jersey frames the Canadiens’ 1924-25 logo – sans the “Champions” label, which was designed to reflect their Stanley Cup Championship the season previous. Unfortunately – or fortunately, depending on your perspective, the Habs elected not to bring back their brown pants for the occasion.
The Montréal Canadiens have the best goaltender in the world, in Carey Price. P.K. Subban is one of the best defencemen in the world. The Bell Centre is the largest hockey arena, by capacity, in the world. The Canadiens have the most Stanley Cup Championships of any team in the world. You can now slot them in as having the best jerseys, too. If there was a high school for sports franchises, the Habs would be the one who is super-smart AND super-attractive AND plays on all of the sports teams AND speaks 6 languages AND is Class President and Valedictorian, all while playing the guitar. And they wonder why everybody hates them. The much-maligned Jonathan Bernier got his first win of the season – his first win since 05 April of this year – last night against the Los Angeles Kings. Yes, it had to come sometime and yes, the Kings were at the end of a lengthy road trip but hey, a victory – and a shutout victory, at that – against one of the top teams in the NHL is definitely something to be proud of. Bernier is fresh off a conditioning stint in the American Hockey League. Since returning to the Leafs, he has had one poor game, one adequate game and, most recently, a great game against his former team, including an outstanding pad stop on sniper Marian Gaborik.
However, there is still a lot of work to be done. Bernier hasn’t had an easy run in Toronto. In fact, the story of his entire career seems to be one of struggle and setbacks. At the 2008 World Juniors, Bernier was selected as one of the goalies for Canada’s entry, splitting duties throughout the Preliminary Round with Steve Mason. Despite having the tougher draw, Bernier, with a 44-save shutout over the Czechs and a 4-3 loss to Sweden, was passed over in favour of the 2-0 Mason, who faced only 38 shots combined over two games against Slovakia and Denmark, stopping 37 of them. Despite Mason’s shaky play in Canada’s QuarterFinal win over Finland, Bernier was again passed over for the SemiFinal. Mason won that game, too, before leading Canada to the gold medal over Team Sweden. Despite his team’s success, Bernier was vocal in his displeasure, both during and after the tournament, at having not been given the same opportunities as Mason. Mason was, admittedly, the better puckhandling goaltender of the two, which Canada’s coaches might have felt would benefit them on the international-sized ice surface – the 2008 tournament was played in the Czech Republic. Or, perhaps Bernier’s loss against Mason’s perfect record made all the difference. Who knows. Whatever the case, Bernier did not endear himself to the hockey community with his unhelpful, albeit understandable, attitude towards the situation. Drafted by Los Angeles, Bernier was set up to take over the Kings’ goaltending throne, before being usurped by another prospect, Jonathan Quick. After the Kings won the 2012 Stanley Cup, a trade request Bernier had originally made before that season’s trade deadline was made public. Despite the championship, Bernier still wanted to go somewhere to be closer to home and, crucially, somewhere where he could be a starter. Again, understandable, given that 2012 Conn Smythe winner Quick had firmly entrenched himself as the starter in LA. But again, more evidence that Bernier is, perhaps, a bit of a difficult personality. On to Toronto where, in 2013-14, Bernier turned in a spectacular season of work in propping up a marginally competitive Maple Leafs team, winning 26 games and posting a .922 Save Percentage. Reality came crashing down when Bernier was injured and James Reimer could not maintain the bailing out of the Leafs’ perpetually sinking boat. And though 2014-15 was a miserable year all around for the Maple Leafs – Bernier included, he still managed a middling .912 Save Percentage. However, the fact remains that Bernier has never had success over a significant enough period of time for him to warrant consideration as an elite National Hockey League goaltender – and perhaps not long enough to even be considered a bona fide starter (rather than a good 1A or 1B option). And yet, Bernier still remains supremely self-confident, bordering on abrasively so, at times. It is this self-confidence, and perhaps not an inherently difficult personality, that I contend is Bernier’s biggest strength – AND his biggest weakness. He has the calm, collected demeanour of Carey Price, rarely appearing rattled. However, much like Price early in his career, this zen model of goaltending has gotten Bernier into trouble. Coolness and calm are fine when things are going well but, when they are not, they lend themselves to accusations of uncaring and apathy. Countless players have been labelled as “lazy” or having a “bad attitude” because of their relaxed demeanour on the ice. As mentioned, Carey Price. Frank Mahovlich, anyone? How about Jaromir Jagr? Bernier’s on-ice behaviour has not helped this perception. His cool, calm manner seems to be central to his playing style, often at the expense of focus and intensity. Certainly, bad goals go in on every goalie. But not at the frequency with which they go in on Bernier. I believe that much of the problem lies with his overly composed, casual nature in the net. How about the goal against the Carolina Hurricanes from a couple of years back? Or pre-Leafs Michael Grabner’s shorthanded tally? Of course, this article would not be complete without Oliver Ekman-Larsson’s legendary snipe. And, from this season, check out Derek Stepan’s entry. Those goals were absolute stinkers, to be sure. But even goals that were not inexplicably awful illustrate my point: the first goal of the 2014-15 season Bernier allowed went in because his pad was not flush with the ice. A weak shot, right along the ice, from a horrible angle: definitely preventable. Or this one, also from last year: he has to seal that post; that just cannot go in. Or, how about this one: I understand standing up for a high shot but it is pretty clear that this one needed to be a butterfly save. Even he stopped it, where was that rebound going? You get the point. To be sure, there are worse goaltenders than Jonathan Bernier in the NHL. And I am equally sure that I could scrounge up enough lowlights to make a pretty decent blooper reel for any National Hockey League ‘tender. However, Leafs fans know a thing or two about questionable goaltending. And no goaltender has made them do this more than Jonathan Bernier. Say what you will about James Reimer and his technique, no one ever questions his intensity and compete level. Bernier probably has more raw talent than Reimer. However, in terms of putting it all together on the ice and, ultimately, producing results? Reimer’s got him beat, hands-down. The main bullet point of the presentation? Bernier gives up a lot of soft goals, and often looks as though he is not even trying. The cool, calm, collected manner he endeavours to project is often a detriment to his game, making him appear casual and apathetic. His self-confidence in himself and the way he plays might be grating on the teams on which he plays, and is definitely so on the fans he plays for. This last point is especially pertinent given that Leafs Nation is used to the self-deprecating, “Aww, shucks”, widely-recognised-all-around-good-guy attitude of tandem compadre, James Reimer. I do not believe for a second that Jonathan Bernier does not try, or that he is in any way apathetic towards his team. I also do not believe he is the goalie he has shown himself to be in the past couple of years. However, to get out of this funk he is in, he needs to channel his zen into focus and his self-confidence into intensity. I believe that Jonathan Bernier should be a starting goaltender in the National Hockey League – and a darn good one, at that. It is up to him to find that consistency that has eluded him so far in his career. Being cool, calm and collected is only helpful until it isn’t. But, look at Carey Price: once one finds that balance between composure and focus, the sky is the limit. |
Peter FerrellThis is a hockey blog. CategoriesArchives
September 2016
|