Coaches, Coaches, Coaches...

You know, I started this blog because I dislike being involved in conversations on message boards that require some kind of support. The reason for this is that few people actually lend that kind of support. Instead they make short statements that may or may not be intended to be assertions of fact. This bothers me on the same level as mosquitos buzzing in my ear. Ultimately, not such a big deal, but at the time that can be very frustrating. Such was a discussion I have been embroiled in for a good part of today. 

This discussion was about candidates for the open coaching job on the Island. The reason why this conversation was frustrating was because, first, I misread a posters post and came back with an answer which became asinine because I was just giving the other poster fodder to make me seem dumb. The second reason why it bothered me is because, like so many times before, the poster chose to pick at only one aspect of my original post. Actually, had he/she chosen to respond to everything I said he would have realized that his rebuttal made little sense. 

I have been meaning to jump on this for a while. But instead I've actually been avoiding it. The reason why is because it seemed to be an uninteresting subject. There are nine or so candidates for the coaching job and they will be interview, it appears, at a pace of about two or three per week. That means that the Isles will have a new coach sometime around the middle or end of August, or maybe even the beginning of September. Thus, the subject was uninteresting because there will be a bunch of speculation as the papers report the new interviews, but nothing dispositive for at least a month. Now, however, I am frustrated and I am going to do a little review of the big three coaching candidates.  And yes, I am probably going to twist this a little in favor of the coach I see as being best for the team. 

Let's go in the order of their interviews shall we? That means, Maurice, Heartly, and Tortorella.

Paul Maurice:

So, unbeknownst to me, Paul Maurice has been in this game much longer than many coaches his age have been. He started coaching in juniors when he was around 26 years of age. That is pretty impressive. Had he not suffered an eye injury he would have kept playing through juniors and beyond. Undaunted though, he led the Detroit Jr. Red Wings to an OHL championship and a record of 86-38-8 over two seasons. After that he moved on to the head spot on the Whalers and, of course, the Hurricanes.While coaching the Whalers and Canes he managed to achieve several winning seasons which included a trip to the Cup finals in 2002. He coached the Hurricanes until 2004 and was fired after two seasons of not making the playoffs. In 2005, Maurice took over as the head coach of the Toronto Marlies, the Maple Leafs farm team. The next year he took over as the head coach of the Leafs. Now, two years later, Maurice was unceremoniously dismissed as coach of the Leafs after not making the playoffs over two seasons. 

Maurice has several strong points. First and foremost, Maurice is packing a wealth of knowledge. He has been doing this for 13 years and has coached at every level of hockey. He knows what he is doing, though, that's a given. He achieved a good deal of success with the Whalers/Hurricanes organization. Because he was there for 8 years he had to have been involved in the development of several players into quality NHLers. Also, he did this while coaching a Whalers team that saw just about as much success as the Islanders teams of the mid-90's. So, to sum that up, Maurice did exactly what the Islanders will be hoping he can do for the team. The big problem is that he was expected to do the same thing for the Leafs. On top of that, he was expected to do this with the very players he had been coaching in the minors the year before. If there weren't a few chances to develop some kids there I don't know what they were. Lastly, Maurice took four seasons to turn the Whalers into a winning team. That is just too long really. Also, over that whole time Maurice has developed a reputation as both a patient teacher, and a bit of a cream puff. For a team with a lot of youth that is probably disadvantageous. 

Bob Hartley and John Tortorella to come...

Scoring?

So, an issue people have been discussing since the middle of last season is where the scoring is going to come from. This is a good question. There is not going to be a lot of scoring. At least as it stands right now. At least if the pessimists are right. 

Right now though, I am going to say that as a matter of logic the pessimists are going to be a least a little bit wrong. In that I mean that there is no possible way the kids are going to put up the same numbers as they did last season. 

One poster I noticed on HFBoards.com went to the lengths of picking a few of the young guys on the team and putting up their goal totals so that he might show that we have lost so much scoring with no tangible replacement for it. To really address people like that I am going to take their stats and twist them a little bit. I am going to use last season to project where the kids may end up and in some cases I am going to use some reality to temper those predictions. 

So, first off I am going to see if Kyle Okposo can competently replace Miro Satan, if Blake Comeau can replace Josef Vasicek, and if Sean Bergenheim can replace Ruslan Fedotenko. I am picking these young guys because they saw NHL time last season on a semi-regular basis, or because they are guaranteed to see nearly first line minutes this season. 

Satan's stats looked like this:

Goals: 16 Assists: 25 Points: 41 +/-: -11 Average Time: 18:19

Vasicek's stats:

G: 16 A: 19 P:35 +/-: 1 AT: 15:51

Fedotenko's Stats:

G: 16 A:17 P: 33 +/-: -9 AT: 16:42

And for the kids we have:

Okposo

G: 2 A: 3 P: 5 +/-: 3 AT: 16:28

Comeau: 

G: 8 A: 7 P: 15 +/-: 1 AT: 11:40

Bergenhiem:

G: 10 A: 12 P: 22 +/-: -3 AT: 11:15

Looking at the stats it seems that the kids did not really do much last season. What a lot of people forget, though, is the ATOI stat (or AT as I put it). ATOI stands for the average time on ice and this is important if you want to accurately project how many points a player is going to score. Logic has it that the longer a player is on the ice, the more scoring opportunities that they will be involved in. ATOI is the first thing to remember here. The second thing to remember is that most of the kids did not play the entire season. Bergenheim is the only one to have played the full season on the Island. 

The way I am going to twist the stats used by the pessimists I am going to do some simple math, at least with Okposo and Comeau. If you do the math, taking the number of points scored and multiplying that with the percentage of the season the kids played and disregarding ice time the kids will get about this many points this season:

Okposo, last season played 9 games, rounding down one game to make it a little easier, Okposo projects as a 50 point scorer. So, not only did he replace Satan, but he is also out scoring Comrie also.

Comeau played in 51 games last season, which is about 60% of the season. He notched 15 points. According to the math, if Comeau played 31 more games, or roughly the other 40% of the season he looks to notch 6 more points for a total of 21.

Begenheim played in 78 games last season and the long and the short of it is that playing in the other four games of the season he should get just one more point. Not very exciting. 

Comeau and Bergenheim are looking at about 20-25% increases in play time and Okposo is looking at maybe a 15% increase in ice time. I am not up to the math for that, but imagine, if you will, the impact of that increased ice time. Basically, the young guys are going to pick up the scoring whether the try or not.  So if I make some kind of educated guess accounting for better ice time and reality what I come up with is Okposo scoring in a range of 45-55 points; Comeau scoring in a range of 25-35 points; and Bergenheim scoring in a range of 25-35 points. 

Other X factors for scoring are going to be the impact that Mark Streit and a healthy Chris Campoli will have as well as the impact Doug Weight might have on the team. Weight by the way, had 25 points in 67 games last season. He also got second and third line minutes playing for the Ducks. By only playing 17 extra games though, Weight was looking at a 30 point season. That is certainly not stellar, but he may very well make sure that at least one of the young guys on the team hits the marks I projected. 

Looking at the numbers, the scoring is probably replaced by playing the kids a little more. If Jeff Tambellini can actually start scoring life could be good. Right now Tamby is looking at scoring 6 points over a whole season. Of the young players on the Isles he received the worst play time for a player expected to score goals. Even Frans Neilsen had a better average ice time than Tambellini. The thing is that Tamby could be a star in the making. Now that he is no longer facing Nolan's ire he should start scoring. There are no obstacles in his way, and most people project him to play on the top lines with Weight and Guerin, two guys who have but one job, to get Tamby the puck in a way that will let him score goals. 

The bottom line is that even with the kids in key spots, the team is no worse off than it was in the middle of last season. The kids could seriously underachieve and not meet my projections, but they could also exceed them. Only time will tell. 

P.S. - this post will eventually be edited. I wrote this very early in the morning So it's going to need it.

R.I.P. Ted Nolan

This is typical Islander BS since Wang took over this franchise. Always trying to do the unexpected...trying to "out smart, or one up everyone else" instead of just doing the right thing. Started from their very first draft when they choose DP first overall. 

To me, what Milbury did and what Garth is doing is anything but courageous, it's totally desperate, period. Good, well run franchises do not need to do the silly, stuff this organization has done since 2000.

Oh, and by the way, let's give Ted nolan a little bit of credit here can we. Do you think for a minute that if any of our prospects really showed they belonged in the NHL he wouldn't play them? Seriously, Comeu, Nilsson, Tambellini, and every other youngster brought up in his 2 year tenure where really not NHL ready, so they didn't play a lot. To think they should be given top 6 minutes or power play tie is nuts.

Unfortunatley, next year will be an absolute disgrace from the start. And one last thing, i said it earlier, no self respecting coach will get a second interview let alone an offer to coach this disaster. And honestly, I don't think for a minute that any self respecting former head coach should even want it. If the concensous is that Teddy wont get another job because he's a GM basher, than what about our owner and GM...why would anyone who's tasted success in this league come here to DIE.

I actually dislike talking about the popular issues. The problem is that along with the popular issues come the most unreasonable statements and ideas about the function of a team. Along with the quote above, taken from IslanderMania, I am going to respond to Scott Burnside's article about Ted Nolan's firing. This article is entitled: "With Nolan Move, Isles Go From Feel Good Story To Laughingstock," and can be found here:

http://sports.espn.go.com/nhl/columns/story?columnist=burnside_scott&id=3487345

I am linking the quote and the article together because they address the same subject, that's obvious, but they also take the same tone. It is almost as if the poster read the article, believed it, and posted taking the sentiments from the article as his or her own. That is reasonable, Mr. Burnside makes a decent point in that is is ridiculous in firing a coach that got something out of the roster when everyone said that the team should be on the bottom of the standings. This is of course on top of the fact that the Islanders have had six, going on seven coaches in the last 8 years. 

The thing that Burnside also points out is that it is the teams that struggle that go through coaches like toilet paper, and usually treat them as such as well. So good on Scott for picking up on that one. I like to talk about the obvious issues too. That makes everything all better. 

The reason why teams do that is because it is impossible to be a winner without balance. In fact, to pull a John Buccigross for a minute:

"You can't ride a bike without balance, so why try and grab the mike without talent." - Atmosphere

I would have the exact lyrics if I could remember the name of the song, I'll edit this when I can remember. Nevertheless, keep up the good job Bucci.

The point is that when teams in any sport do this type of thing it is because they are seeking to achieve balance. Team management will usually do what it likes. Here the Islanders management has sought to build a winning team. 

For the first seven or eight seasons they tried to build a winner by buying talent. That certainly could work, but the problem is that the team has had difficulty attracting talent. It did not seem to be that big of a deal when the team had attracted Peca, Osgood, Yashin, and Co. in the early 2000's, but really none of those guys proved to be game changers. Osgood was always there to hold DiPietro's spot and Peca became good trade bait. We all know the Yashin story. The thing is that the teams of 2001-2003 weren't really that bad. They were consistently in the playoffs and they fought. The problem was that the team never escaped the first round. After that, Laviolette was fired and the team was lost. 

So now, five or six year later, the team is looking to get better. The problem is not Charles Wang exactly. Wang does not know hockey, but he does know business. It is good for business to have a winning team. It just so happens that Wang does not know exactly how to build a winning team. That's not to say the team is not trying. 

To that end Garth Snow, after trying to keep to the 2001-2004 model tried to buy talent and failed. So what to do? Pick a new direction and go. 

Garth ultimately picked the direction that was popular on the message boards and with the fans in general, i.e. a rebuild. To accomplish this rebuild Snow had to replenish the farm system while also attempting to pick some topflight talent. At the 2008 draft he showed what some people in the hockey world acclaimed as savvy. He turned his fifth overall pick into two extra picks and Josh Bailey. This really was smart. In a year or probably two (maybe even three) the Sound Tigers may be a mirror of the Chicago Wolves. Shortly thereafter, the team will start an upward trend. 

After the draft, Snow sought to find another veteran leader and a puck moving defenseman. That was it. I though he should probably add one more player, probably Ladislav Nagy, to the fold. If anything Nagy would add to the team's entertainment value. That is important if the fans have to deal with a losing season. Nevertheless, Snow seems to have executed a plan. He got a veteran that is happy to play with his friend and show the kids a thing or two, and an offensive defenseman that will be an island in a sea of defensive defensemen. Perhaps Chris Campoli will learn a thing or two from our new Swiss friend. The bottom line is that Snow put the team in a position to play the young guys. 

The way he did that was by following the last season off season's model and let the free agents walk. Well, he did really did not want that to happen last year, but hey, it was called for here. By letting Satan and Fedotenko walk he opened up some space for at least Comeau and Okposo to show what they are made of. Also, Jeff Tambellini is going to get his shot. My guess is that once these kids see more than 8-11 minutes per game they will bloom. At least Okposo and Comeau will. They both showed that they can score. Okposo saw the same time on the ice as Andy Hilbert last season, but played in 20 fewer games. He totaled 15 points to Hilbert's 16; mathematically that works out to about 29 points. Okposo scored 5 points in 9 games, which works out to 55 points which would have been the best on the team. 

Ultimately, what this represents is that playing the kids over the grind lines last season might have saved Nolan's Job. If you add the say, 20-30 points Comeau would have scored and the unknown number of point Tambellini would have gotten, the team would not have fallen off like it did. He also would have shown that he was on board with the youth movement. However, Nolan did not do any of that. He decided instead to go with what he wanted. He played the grinders. Players who are usually slated for the fourth line got first and second line minutes. They got these minutes over young players that were more offensively minded and offensively talented. That was Nolan's mistake. 

It is hard for a coach to talk to players about being team players while not trying to be one himself. It is no wonder then that it was reported that Nolan had lost the respect of some one the veterans on the team. 

In losing Nolan the team is developing balance. Maybe. That depends upon which coach they choose as Nolan's successor. If they choose a coach purely as a babysitter then there will be another coach in the not too distant future. If not, then the team can do the smart thing and execute its plan for the next several years. 

To tell the truth though, Ted Nolan was going to become a disruptive force. He did not vibe with management, and he did not believe that he should give the kids play time even though they would likely more productive than his coach's pets. So, while Nolan was a master at turning water into wine, he was turning into the one person preventing the rebuild. 

And a note to Scott Burnside. You summed up the Islanders' free agent signings in your most recent article by saying this:

Given that Snow managed to lure only defensively challenged defenseman Mark Streit, with a whopper contract, and fading Doug Weightto the fold, it appears he need not have worried.

However, in grading the Islanders' free agent signings on July 1 you said this:

Long Island bound

Streit

• Islanders sign defenseman Mark Streit to five-year deal
We're not sure exactly what to make of Mark Streit and his 62-point campaign from last season; we're also not too sure what to make of the New York Islanders, who continue to be competitive even though, on paper, they have no business being anywhere but near the bottom of the Eastern Conference. GM Garth Snow will always have trouble attracting top-flight free-agent talent to Long Island until the Isles either build a new arena or dramatically improve the current barn. That means he's got to work a lot harder to build a winner. Streit, then, is a nice addition for a team that is long on work ethic and short on production. He can play forward if need be, but will add some nice jump to a blue-line corps whose top point producer, Chris Campoli, had 18 points.
Free-agency grade: B

So, which is it Scott? Come on man. I know you only gave the Isles a "B," but how do you rectify the first statement with the second? I guess you do not happen to be an Islanders fan, and that is fine with me, but at least be consistent. Where did you say that Mark Streit's signing being a B was contingent on Nolan sticking around? And last I heard, Mark Streit was the bargain pickup for free agent defensemen. Would you have preferred it if the Islanders paid Wade Redden six million plus per year? That is ridiculous. But, at least you get paid to do this. Sorry Scott, I usually agree with the things you write, but this time all you were doing was trying to prod Islanders fans. That in no way represents objective writing. At least be consistent. 

By the way, it is after 12 so I make no representations about spelling, grammar, and syntax. If I messed up somewhere sorry. I'm usually a stickler for grammar and try to limit my conjunctions even when I write my blogs. High five Islanders fans, I'll catch you on the flip side. 

The Response

So, Terry Frei, being an upstanding guy actually sent a response to my e-mail. To tell the truth I though briefly about wetting my pants because a sports writer actually responded to my e-mail. That's never happened. Anyways, here's his response:

MJS--

Thanks for the feedback. I was not using it as a legal term, but as an everyday life term.

Cordially,

Terry 

That was basically the total correspondence between us, you know his response and my letter which can be seen in my previous blog. 

Okay, so I just want to break things down a little quickly. While I have the utmost respect for professional writers, and Mr. Frei is included here, they can manage to be deflective if they feel like it. 

Now, I didn't want to get too into the legalities of what Terry wrote, but I did want to make a point that misusing legal terms can hurt your overall message or the sport you happen to be discussing. As per his e-mail, we're going to have to take Terry Frei at his word, that he was using implied consent as "an every day life term." But come on, the last time that I heard "implied consent" in regular conversation was never; at least in any conversation that didn't involve the law. Also, if you look at the context in his article, it was clearly a statement about the law. 

I am making such a big deal about sports and the law because while, in watching a game the idea of the law never comes up, whenever sports are discussed in the real world there is often a legal discussion to go with it. Think about the things that have gone on in sports in the last year or so. There has been Michael Vick, Pacman Jones, and their ilk combined with things like the CBA and the European transfer agreement in hockey, as well as a CBA issue that will start to evolve in the next year or so in the NFL. 

Also, I think adding the legal discussion to the NHL actually helps the league's credibility. Every time the law is brought into the pro sports conversation it is because someone got shot, robbed, arrested, etc. We hardly ever see how a sport can interact with the law in ways that can be, probably not positive, but at least right. This law suit is a demonstration of how there are rules and boundaries in the league and how they can be broken. Why is that good? Because it shows just how far things in hockey like checking and fighting go. This suit would help clarify issues like "The Code" and the roles enforcers play in the sport. 

Many people see those types of players in a negative light, no better than common thugs. But most non-hockey fans don't know the code. They don't know that you're not supposed to throw sucker punches. They don't know how most fights are agreed to ahead of time. They just don't know. Because they don't know how or why fighting is acceptable to the players they don't know why the league condones it. The league's perception of hockey fights is that anything goes. There has been a need for a long time of a way to clarify the difference between savagery and a consensual scrap. Steve Moore's lawsuit would help do that. 

The problem is that the suit is likely to be settled before it goes to trial. 95% or more of lawsuits get settled before they ever see a court room, I'm sure it also works that way in Canada. 

This suit shouldn't be seen as an embarrassment to the league. It should be seen as a way to get some credibility for the league. If Gary Bettman was smart he would make a statement saying that he was glad that there was resolution to this issue and that he was glad that, since the issue called for it, the law was able to resolve Steve's problems. At the same time, Gary doesn't need to say anything about Todd Bertuzzi. He can just not say anything about it. 

I hope that this gets resolved because it has been far too long already. Both Todd Bertuzzi and Steve Moore need it. The league seems completely indifferent to it now. They shouldn't be. They should help the process however they can, and try and be better for it. 

My Letter to Terry Frei

I am sure this is being spoken about somewhere in the world. Terry Frei, respected writer that he is put this article up on ESPN.com. It was a discussion of what will become of Todd Bertuzzi. This, like my post about Brian Burke and Kevin Lowe falls under the category of all things hockey. I, for my part, wrote the good Mr. Frei to respond and bring up an issue that I find to be hurtful to hockey. The discussion of violence in the sport is one that is full of video footage and statements taken out of context. In my e-mail I discuss what happens when the violence goes too far, and what should happen, contrasted with Terry Frei's opinion on the matter. I hope my e-mail is a good read. Here's a link to Frei's article and the e-mail is below:

http://sports.espn.go.com/nhl/columns/story?columnist=frei_terry&id=3483260

Terry,

Though your article about Todd Bertuzzi has been up for a day or two I only recently got to read it. Generally I agreed with what you put down. Todd Bertuzzi will have a dark cloud hanging over him for far longer than he will play in the NHL. I just wanted to address your discussion of Steve Moore's lawsuit, both from the perspective of a fan and that of a law student. 

I am sorry that I am writing out of annoyance, but it bothers me when people use legal terms, if not definitively, then as reasons for being dismissive. In this case the term you used is "implied consent." Now, I am not a lawyer yet, this is true, and I am sure there are a number of them that would not agree with me, but while you are correct in saying implied consent would be an issue in any Moore-Bertuzzi lawsuit, you are incorrect in using it as a way to dismiss the possibility of such an incident going to court. 

The fact of the matter is that such incidents have already been to court and will continue to go to court in the future. I will point you to a case with remarkably similar facts that said implied consent was not applicable as a matter of law, Hackbart v. Cincinnati Bengals, Inc., 601 F.2d 516 (1979). In that case, Hackbart was sucker punched in the back of the head during a football game. He ended up with a broken neck, and then subsequently went to court. The long and the short of it is that the 10th Circuit Court found that someone could not consent to being hit in a way that was outside the scope of the rules of the game. Such were the punches that Todd Betuzzi landed on Steve Moore. 

Essentially, by dismissing a successful action by Moore you make the point, intentionally or not, that anything goes in hockey and that all players consent to the actions any ruffian feels like taking. As the Hackbart court said, "Therefore, the notion is not correct that all reason has been abandoned, whereby the only possible remedy for the person who has been the victim of an unlawful blow is retaliation..." 

You are not wrong in implying that not every single injury or wrongful action taken in hockey and other sports should be litigated. But, dismissing any such action is wrong. Athletes are entitled to have their legal ills cured by the court as much as you, I, or anyone else is. 

As a fan I feel like such dismissive statements hurt the game as much as anything that any cable-news pundit could say. In fact, it happens to be closely in line with their thought process. Every time one of those personalities gets ahold of hockey they always bring up fighting as an issue, and they always have to ask what more can be done? They love to play on how violent a game hockey is and how there a few rules. By inserting implied or informed consent to the discussion you and those pundits erroneously tell people how little can be done to help these athletes.

It is hurtful to the sport to paint it as outside of the law, and to state that a player that has been harmed cannot seek help from the court. You said that it would be embarrassing to the NHL if there were a successful lawsuit, and I say that it would help give the league an air of legitimacy that it so sorely needs. While a suit would end up airing some of the league's dirty laundry, the end result would be help for a person who elected to become a professional hockey player and had his profession taken away from him by the willful act of another person. Right now, any of the cable-news pundits would call every hockey player a thug. Steve Moore's suit could finally show them, for a time at least, that there is a right way to play hockey and a wrong way, and that those that play the wrong way get punished for it. Todd Bertuzzi is likely going to be punished for his actions by the courts, not because he is an athlete or a thug, but because Steve Moore has the same rights as someone who slips and falls on a sidewalk. 

All in all Mr. Frei, I was not trying to just lay down a lengthy diatribe about the law. More I just wanted to try and protect my favorite sport from harm by comments likely intended for brevity than anything else. I also wanted to introduce to you a perspective on professional sports that it seems you have not given total consideration. I hope you had time to read this e-mail fully, and while I acknowledge that I probably will not get a response, any reply would be welcome.

Thanks for your time.

Sincerely,

MJS

How Lowe Con You Go?

Two boys sit in the back seat of a car. The younger one stares straight ahead, focused on the seat in front of him currently occupied by his father. The older boy has a look on his face of pure contempt and is trying his best to get his brother to notice it. He has been ignored for most of this past year, including the duration of this car ride. To this point of the ride his face has been turning progressively redder and redder. He has tried everything he can think of. He has screamed and yelled, took a stick and poked his brother, and every few weeks he has reminded all his friends that his younger brother has cooties. Until this point, there has been nothing. The younger boy has been doing his best Ghandi impersonation. For all the effort the elder boy has put into his shock and awe campaign not one word has made it to the boys' father who has been trying to focus on getting the family out of their economic jam. 

The elder boy decides that he is just going to keep trying. His face is getting tired from his perpetual frowning, anyway. The older boy picks his nose; really digs in and finds a piece of mold-colored gold. He rolls it into a ball, aims, and throws. The booger arcs through the air and lands exactly in the middle of the younger boy's temple. Wonderful. 

Before the older boy's satisfaction can curl the corners of his mouth into a smile, a small fist flies out of nowhere and strikes him in the shoulder. Suddenly, satisfaction turns to chagrin. The whole world seems like it is ending. The younger boy settles back into his seat and goes back to looking at the seat in front of him.

A single tear rolls down the older boy's cheek. His upper lip starts to quiver. Before he can help himself the older boy screams out "Dad he hit me!" Then the tears start flowing.

Upon hearing screaming and crying dad finds a good place, pulls over, and turns to look into the back seat. Dad furrows his brow a little bit. Looks back and forth, and decides what to do. He shakes his finger in their general direction. "Now boys," he says, "I know that you two haven't seen eye to eye lately, but fighting about it isn't going to change anything." Both boys were just looking at him. It was hard for dad to work so much. He had become an absentee authority figure and both boys knew it. He continued though, "When we get home we are going to talk this over, figure out what's wrong and work this out."

The older boy saw an opportunity here. He went for it. "Daddy, I'll tell you what's wrong. I'm still mad at him for the last juice box last year. That was special juice and I wanted it." He sniffled for effect, the went on. "It's not fair. I don't care if mom said it was first come first serve. I wanted it."

Dad rolled his eyes, he knew this was the problem and it really had gone on too long. He looked to the younger boy. "What do you have to say about this?"

The younger boy looked at his father right in the eye and said, "Where do I begin? He's a moron first of all. Secondly, really thinks that any news is good news. Thirdly, he loves the limelight and I don't think anyone around the sandbox will dispute that. Lastly, he's on a pathetic little league team that can't even get on any page of the newspaper let alone the front page of the sports... and I'm sorry for saying that Daddy."

Dad was a little miffed. He looked to the older boy and said, "Okay, buddy, how do want to respond to that?" 

"I just want to say that he," sniffling again, "he lies to people, and he said that you have a pointy nose Daddy, and he said that Mommy's got fat thighs, and he steals out of Mommy's purse, and you need to look into all of that right now."

The younger boy just sat there with a blank expression on his face. He said his part, and even though he was the younger one, he knew his brother was really being the baby. Dad looked back and forth between the boys and just shook his head. This was simply ridiculous and everyone knew it. 

Credits:

Dad: Gary Bettman

Older Boy: Brian Burke

Younger Boy: Kevin Lowe

Juice Box: Dustin Penner

Disseminating Information

Everyone has an opinion and I am going to use this space to get mine out there. 

I love to leave comments on various aspects of the hockey world on discussion boards such as IslanderMania, HFBoards, etc. The thing is I just cannot stand some of the things people say there. Some of the users there are outrageous, some are preachy, some only see the world as it exists in video games. The point you can only really ever get into a conversation that is at all reasonable about 50% of the time; maybe less. 

For someone like me that is just unbearable. 

So here I am going to lay down my opinions on things that people say. I am going to take topics and comments from message boards and try to work through them. Sometimes though, I am going to make my own preachy statements or pick up a topic that I feel like discussing. 

I am stuck far away from Long Island, which is too bad because I am a big Islanders fan. So, since I cannot go to games I have to find other ways to get involved. The web chatter is my best way to do this.

Hopefully I can have some fun with this, and hopefully I get to develop some stimulating conversation.