Wednesday, October 11

1 - A few random thoughts on the new NHL season:

a) I haven't liked Toronto since the early 90's when Wendel Clark, Ken Baumgartner, Felix Potvin, and Doug Gilmour where the darlings of Canadian hockey fans. Since then the Leafs line-up has induced nothing by nauseous feelings at regular intervals. However, much-maligned GM John Ferguson Jr. has actually assembled a fairly strong, young core. If the Leafs stick with Andrew Raycroft, Alexander Steen, Matt Stajan, Kyle Wellwood, and company, I actually won't mind watching them. Here's hoping the Leafs can be patient and avoid signing over the hill vets to pricey contracts.

b) After seeing Kari Lehtonen and the Thrashers rip up the competition early in the season, I now understand why Atlanta GM Don Waddell ignored my suggestion about acquiring Marc-Andre Fleury. Speaking of Fleury his 40 save shut-out was a nice way to start the season wasn't it.

c) Will Pittsburgh please get a tough guy. And not just any tough guy, someone who strikes fear in the heart of even the most grizzled knuckle-tosser. Trash-talk and tight checking are to be expected, but Sidney Crosby getting his teeth raked by Peter Forsberg's stick in the middle of a scrum is at a whole different cup of grits. It's Peter Forsberg for crying out loud!

d) Premature Off-Season Free Agent Signing Analysis:

Losers - Boston (Gave Zdeno Chara everything the Senators wouldn't, and then gave up 8 goals in their season opener.), St. Louis (How long until Coach Mike Kitchen gets fired?), Phoenix (Jovanovski not enough, apparently.), Calgary (Alex Tanguay underwhelming in debut.).

Winners - Anaheim (Insert Chris Pronger, and give up only 4 goals in 3 games. If only life were that simple.), Vancouver (Who needs Anson Carter when you've got the best goalie in the league.), Buffalo (Who thought they would lose all those players and still be competitive. Not me.)

2 - Most politically incorrect article of the week: here.

Direct quote:

"Call it the Homer Simpson effect: Being fat makes you dumber..."

Ouch.

3 - Timeline of Events:

Tuesday: North Korea vows to test nuclear weapons.
Wednesday: U.N. and others get together to 'talk' about what to do.
Thursday: Still talking.
Friday: U.N. and others 'unanimously warn' North Korea about consequences of testing.
Monday: (Boom!)
Tuesday: Canadian Media begins questioning the legitimacy of supposed testing.
Wednesday: North Korea verifies claim, calling it a 'success'.

First of all, let me say there is nothing wrong with 'questioning the legitimacy' of a news report. In fact, if you are a reporter, and you're not fact checking, then you're not very good at your job. This is a very important question, because support for future action (regardless of what that action may be) against North Korea will hinge on how the voting public views these tests. Very simply, if they (in this case 'they' being the would be antagonist who, for whatever reason, either doesn't care, or is encouraged by the concept of North Korea building it's own nuclear weapons) are able to convince the voting public these tests are false, then any action will be seen as reckless and pre-mature. In the coming months, I wouldn't be surprised to hear this argument 'How do they (they in this case being George 'Dubya' Bush and co.) know North Korea isn't just trying to distract us from the real enemy by faking a nuclear test?' Of course, in order for that argument to fly you have to believe the test was faked in the first place.

4 - Meanwhile, back on the CBC website, letter writer Helen from Calgary offers the vague generalization of the day (which, by the way, is a logical fallacy, I learned today), when she writes:

"While I'm horrified that an unstable government such as North Korea has managed to become nuclear, I'm much more concerned about the weapons of mass destruction being manufactured to the south of us.

"They're much closer, armed to the teeth and pretty unstable considering past performance."

Care to specify which past performance? There's a lot of history to cover there Helen. No need to go into detail, but an example would be nice. Afterall, it's been a long time since the U.S. has threatened to nuke anyone. I wonder if letters like this will still be showing up in newspapers when Dubya's term is over.

5 - Liberal leadership campaign highlights:

Candidate Joe Volpe fined.
Candidate Bob Rae breaks rules.
Candidate Michael Ignatieff signs up dead people.
Candidate Joe Volpe signs up children.
Candidate Stephane Dion accused of plagiarism. (Defense)
Candidate Michael Ignatieff accused of plagiarism. (Defense)

Why do I bring up so many negative stories? Possibly to show that the Liberal Party has not learned any lessons from the last election. In my humble, slightly educated, opinion Gerard Kennedy, Ken Dryden and Martha Hall Findlay are the best candidates for the job of Liberal leader, simply because they appear to keep their noses clean.

6 - From the 'where are they now?' file comes word that Nealon Greene is 'facing an uncertain future' in Montreal. Little known fact: Don Matthews brought Nealon Greene into the CFL with the Argo's back in the late 90's. Don Matthews brought Nealon Greene with him to Edmonton after leaving Toronto. Don Matthews brought Greene to Montreal this season. Don Matthews is now no longer the Al's head coach, hence the uncertainty. Actually, not to be mean, but I think uncertainty to a sugar-coated way of describing his situation.

7 - Now this is good journalism, and this is an example of why good journalists are sometimes hard to find on the international scene.

8 - Is Sidney Crosby better than Alexander Ovechkin? Yes, way better, and here's why. Quickly, if you can, name the guys who are playing on Crosby's line in Pittsburgh. Shouldn't be too hard, it's ex. Red Deer Rebel Colby Armstrong, and Nils Ekman, who skated beside Joe Thornton and Jonathon Cheechoo last season, and this year flanks Sid the Kid (Note to Nils, if you've never bought a lottery ticket in your life, now would be a good time to start). Now, if you can, name Ovechkin's linemates in Washington... ... ... ... does Richard Zednik or Danus Zubrus ring a bell. It probably does, but here's the point. As far as fantasy hockey is concerned Zednik and Zubrus have trippled, possibly even quadrupled, the offensive output of Armstrong and Ekman over the course of their collective careers. So why all the fantasy talk about Crosby's no-name linemates while Zubrus and Zednik get shafted? Is it because of injuries? Is it because Washington coach Glen Hanlon juggles lines like a two-timing boyfriend juggles girlfriends? No, it's because anyone who plays on a line with Crosby is guaranteed to pile up the points. Can't say the same thing about Ovechkin. The Russian Wunderkid is still a talented player, perhaps even more talented than Crosby, but the fact of the matter is that Crosby makes the no-names around him play on another level. Ovechkin scores some fabulous highlight reel goals, but his linemates havn't exceeded expectations. Luc Robitaille once said a fire hydrant could score 50 goals playing on a line with Mario Lemieux. I would say that logic applies to Crosby too, but not Ovechkin.

Man on Fire