the NHLPA firing Jim Kelly: If you needed evidence that the PA was in trouble, you have it. My take on this is simple: the firing was done by a very small group of people without consulting the larger membership. Effectively, it was the thirty team reps — and it looks to me like a small group manipulated them with carefully crafted and biased information that wasn’t distributed ahead of the meeting and where the team reps weren’t given time to think it through or consult with the rest of the players they represented.Was it really so urgent that the NHLPA COULD NOT wait two weeks for camps to open, when all of the players would be in town and the team reps could discuss the information with them and make them all part of the process?

via The summer of hockey’s discontent.

well, the membership seems to be figuring out they got gamed:

It’s possible, according to player sources, that one or more NHLPA members will insist on an immediate, thorough, and independent investigation of not only the process that led to Kelly’s dismissal but also of those who perpetrated it. Clearly, some players are finally waking up to smell the reality that, as one veteran told me last week, “Paul got sewered.’’

The stench has reached the membership, and it is leading them to do something about it.

via Firing generates heat – The Boston Globe.

And something tells me this is both going to get really ugly before it gets better, and it’s going to totally screw over the effectiveness of the player’s association for a good period of time — at a time when they desperately need to have their act together before the start of the next CBA negotiation. And hopefully, the membership will realize that it’s because a few people were willing to destroy the union rather than let it be run in a way they didn’t like — and deal with those people appropriately. I can name one obvious name right from the top… But do I really need to?

I’m a bit late to the party, perhaps, but some thoughts on the Heatley trade.

My initial reaction was — and it somewhat surprised me — that since Marleau wasn’t part of the trade, that maybe it was okay. Heatley still has to prove to me he’s bringing the right attitude, but honestly, Doug Wilson’s a much better judge of that than I am, and I’ll give him the benefit of the doubt until proven otherwise. And honestly? It fits in line with something I said back in 2008, which Puck Daddy was nice enough to dredge up for me and point to.

My bottom line is that I’m happier because the trade didn’t involve Marleau, but I still need to see Heatley bring the right attitude and the right game, and if he does, then  this is a great trade. if he doesn’t — Wilson will have to deal with it.

I’m not unhappy at seeing Michalek and Cheechoo go. Well, I’ll miss them because I enjoyed watching them play, especially Cheechoo, but I always felt Michalek had a “next step” he never figured out how to use consistently, and I think we saw the best of Cheechoo and he had no real upside. With any luck, new teams and fresh starts will help them, but they weren’t going to get better in San jose.

One question brought up to me, since I’d mentioned Larionov and his demanding his way off the team — why do I give Larionov a pass on that and not Heatley?

I had to think about that one a bit, and here’s why: Larionov had a strong track record as a player for his ethics and his committment. he was also a winner with multiple organizations. Because of that when he speaks up about something taht’s wrong — and time really proved him right in San Jose — you listen.

Heatley doesn’t have that. Heatley’s proven that in the NHL, he can score lots of goals, but he’s never proven himself as a winner. he’s also indicated through his actions in Ottawa that when he doesn’t get his way, he pouts and quits. He now has to prove himself NOT to be a quitter — and only time will tell about that. Right now, though, he doesn’t have that track record to stand on, and his actiosn the last few months put him in a negative light to many of us. He has to prove that wrong. And I’m willing to let him, but he doesn’t get a free ride, because he hasn’t earned one yet.

We asked Scott Emmert, director of media relations for the Sharks, about the snubs and he encourages fans “not read into them.” He said that just because a particular player isn’t listed doesn’t mean they aren’t going to be featured in another promotional venture for the season. One look at the online season-ticket info page reinforces that: Marleau and Nabokov are still among the players pictured.

via Nabokov, Marleau snubbed in promo letter; Sharks respond – Puck Daddy – NHL – Yahoo! Sports.

Many years ago, the Sharks put Igor Larionov on the cover of the in-game magazine, just as Igor and Kevin Constantine got into a fight that led to Larionov demanding a trade and ending up a Red Wing (and winning a stanley cup….). The Sharks were left handing out magazines for a number of games that  featured a player that was no longer on the team, and had left rather loudly and unhappy. It rankled the fans, and it rankled the Sharks.

And since then they’ve been careful to not put players on long-term promotional items (like tickets) unless they were sure that they were going to be sharks (barring unexpected things). So while I normally recommend not reading too much into things like ticket pictures, in this case, the Sharks have a track record of being careful — if Marleau and Nabokov aren’t on the tickets, then someone must think these players have a chance of not being here by the trade deadline. Current “three way marleau to the kings” rumor notwithstanding, one shouldn’t read into this as a short-term probability as much as a long-term possibility. Doug Wilson is clearly looking to make sure the team is fixed for the playoffs (if it already isn’t), not opening day…

This seems to have been a good summer to decide to get away from hockey for a while. Last season was a lot of fun, and a lot of great things happened — good attendance, the Winter Classic in Chicago that Laurie went to, great playoffs (except for the Sharks. sigh), improved TV ratings. The NHL came out of the lockout looking like it had things going well and this last season showed me it was building on the momentum.

And now, here we are, almost at the start of training camp, and what’s been going on?

• The Dany Heatley “I want out” whine-fest.
• The Coyotes saga
• Jim Balsillie
• The Versus/DirecTV pissing match
• The NHLPA firing of their leader

And last — and perhaps least –

• The Sharks playoff collapse and off-season moves…

That is, unfortunately, more than enough grief for one league in one year, and we haven’t even touched on the economic downturn the league faces this year.

What’s all this mean for the league? Some thoughts:

Dany Heatley: Just what I really want to hear about; another spoiled athlete who demanded lots of money and a no-trade clause bailing on his team as soon as someone doesn’t wipe his nose when he sneezes. Gee, that sucks. Dear Dany: Please shut up and play hockey. One reason I love hockey is that athletes like you are really rare in the game. I hope that never changes.

Dany Heatley Part 2: Dear Doug Wilson. Without asking whether or not the rumors of the Sharks trying to get Heatley are true or not, an earnest question: ARE YOU CRAZY? He can score goals, but he hasn’t shown his ability to be a winner (as opposed to a whiner, which he’s proven quite nicely). He’s a chemistry problem waiting to happen, and bringing him to San Jose will be the worst mistake the Sharks could make since, um, Ray Sheppard and Craig Janney. Please don’t.

The Coyotes Saga: What a mess. It is, of course, easy to blame Bettman, but in reality, Bettman was working the ownership into an agreement to sell, and Moyes decided to slip the knife in from behind and jump to bankruptcy court with Balsillie. Why? Because Balsillie structured a deal that got money back to Moyes and cut his losses, even if that deal (as we’re showing) fraks over the Coyotes, the city of Glendale, the League, Coyotes fans, hockey fans in general, the players, especially the Coyotes players, and other creditors of the Coyotes. This is standard procedure for both guys — don’t worry about anyone else, just take what you want and let the court sort it out.

And once it hits bankruptcy court, it’s a crapshoot for everyone. Moyes and Balsillie may have thought they had this scoped out, but the bankruptcy judge has an amazing amount of leeway and isn’t necessarily interested in playing the fool. I’ve been quite impressed with how the judge his handling this case — including a very careful and obvious intention to not end up in legal casebooks as the person setting any kind of significant precedent here. He’s handled this like the live grenade it is in the legal world, and I give him a lot of credit for moving carefully and conservatively.

What can be presumed about the outcome? About the only thing I can guarantee is that at this point, anything coming out of the bankruptcy court will head right to appeals court. Every time I see a media person or a blogger say “we’ll have some answers at the hearing today!” I chuckle, because this is just the beginning.  Sit back and pop popcorn. We’re still in Act I. Moyes showed that the legal agreements he had with the league only mattered while he benefitted from them, and then he did what he wanted — and the league will ultimately clean up the mess, while the fans will blame Bettman. Wanna know what a “bad owner” is in a league? Here’s one.

Jim Balsillie: When you look at it that way, it should become obvious why the league isn’t interested in having him as an owner. Too many fans only see the possibility of a team in southern ontario or that he has lots of money and declare him to be a good owner — and forget that one part of being a good owner is a willingness to work within the rules of the league and work with the other owners to make the game better. Balsillie’s failed miserably at those aspects, multiple times, and again here with the Coyotes. So why are people surprised the other owners see him as a problem?

Let’s not forget that Mark Cuban wanted to buy the Cubs. Given his — attitude — as an owner of the Mavericks, whether you appreciate his candor or not (I generally do…), was I surprised that major league baseball made damn sure his bid wasn’t ever seriously in the running? You can complain that the owners group is a “club” — but there are reasons for that, including a need to cooperate for the good of the game. Has Balsillie ever shown any hint he’s willing or interested in diong that?

I think Balsillie owning an NHL team would be a huge problem for the league over time, for the same reason Moyes owning the Coyotes did: ultimately, they are similar types of owners, ones that have no problem screwing over the league (and fans, and players, and everyone associated with it) to get what they want. How is that good for hockey?

And before my friends in Canada come raining down scorn for trashing the guy — I’m fully in favor of a team in Southern Ontario. Just not owned by Balsillie. And preferably not in Hamilton (I’m far from convinced the $100 million upgrade will turn that arena into a real NHL building, any more than $100 million would have turned the Cow Palace into anything other than an ugly old barn with lipstick), but perhaps more in the Kingston area. Not gonna happen, probably, but I’d like to see it. My worry about Hamilton is that a team there would affect the Sabres, and that’s a bad thing. A team in Kingston might draw more from Leaf territory, and the best thing you can do to make the Leafs more competitive is to make them less fat and happy and complacent… Of course, the Leafs owners wouldn’t agree to that easily…

The Versus/DirecTV pissing match: my short answer: pay zero attention until the season starts. Negotiations like this, and labor negotiations, never get settled until the very last minute (or some time after it…). Everything until then is posturing by both sides. I’ll take “one week into the season” in the pool for when this gets solved. Personal opinion — I think Versus is being somewhat too greedy in their demands, so my sympathies are somewhat with DirecTV here. And frankly, I’d probably be a lot more annoyed at not having Versus if they paid a little attention to the West Coast once in a while. Here in Sharks territory, Versus is pretty useless with the eastern conference lineups and games that are mostly over when you get home from work… So I don’t see it as a great loss, personally.

The NHLPA firing Jim Kelly: If you needed evidence that the PA was in trouble, you have it. My take on this is simple: the firing was done by a very small group of people without consulting the larger membership. Effectively, it was the thirty team reps — and it looks to me like a small group manipulated them with carefully crafted (and biased) information that wasn’t distributed ahead of the meeting and where the team reps weren’t given time to think it through or consult with the rest of the players they represented.

Was it really so urgent that the NHLPA COULD NOT wait two weeks for camps to open, when all of the players would be in town and the team reps could discuss the information with them and make them all part of the process?

No. Which implies that whoever orchestrated this knew that if this information was distributed to the membership and evaluated, it would be rejected. So this was an orchestrated coup by a group that knew it could manipulate the team reps and knew the membership at large wouldn’t buy in, so they made sure the membership didn’t get a voice.

If the general membership lets them get away with this, they get what they deserve. It’s clear there are serious factions within the union, and at least one faction is willing to destroy the union rather than let some other group run it. And they may well be succeeding. Given that so many players in the union really don’t care as long as the paychecks keep coming, if the NHLPA thinks it is going to succeed with a hard-ass attitude, then the owners have to be thrilled at this. Kelly knew that, and had a plan I really liked for moving things forward — but he got taken out back and shot in the middle of the night (literally).

And I think the union will get what it deserves out of this, and is going to be royally unhappy when it happens.

And finally –

The Sharks playoff collapse and off-season moves…

I’m pretty satisfied with what Wilson has done in the off-season. I’m happy we do NOT have Heatley. I’m willing to bet that Wilson tried just hard enough to land “the Monster” to come in second, which is a nice way to put pressure on Nabokov without actually having to commit the money. Stripping Marleau (and everyone) of the “C” and “A” is an interesting tactic, also.

Fans (and media) complaining about the lack of the “blockbuster” move to shake up the team are being impatient. Wilson has until the start of the playoffs, not the start of the season, to fix this team. What he’s done instead is spend the summer doing things that cause the players to stew on the failure rather than write it off — and I’m sure he’s waiting to see if the players respond by showing up ready and angry and committed. Any player that doesn’t will likely get purged. San Jose is a franchise where leaks simply don’t happen. this summer there have been leaks and statements — aimed at two key guys, Marleau and Nabokov — that seem clearly designed to put the pressure on them to respond, and respond on the ice. It’s now up to them to respond. If they do, the Sharks get better without disrupting the roster. If they don’t — Wilson has his answer, and changes will be made. The fact is, Wilson is still evaluating those players, and evaluating them the only way that really matters: by waiting to see how they respond on the ice.

Fans (and media) have also complained that “all” Wilson’s done is make changes on the third and fourth lines. That’s correct. The fans (and media) also forget that the playoff failure was in large part because the third and fourth lines fell apart and played really, really badly; that failure has been addressed. I’m sorry to see Grier go, Goc go, and Roenick retire — but all three are clearly the right moves.

Also the right move: trading Erhoff. I’ve generally been a strong supporter of his, and early last season he was playing amazing hockey, but over the season, he went from playing amazing hockey to playing inconsistent, enigmatic hockey. I have no idea why, but some nights, he was most notable for what he didn’t do — it’s one thing to be Mike Rathje and play 22 minutes a night and never be noticed, because Rat was always a shutdown guy. It’s another to be Erhoff and play 20 minutes and be noticed for a lack of expected offense and for those really visible mistakes. His ultimate failure in San Jose was a lack of consistency, and all of his good play kept getting sidetracked by those really bad shifts every game or two. I’m ready to see if a fresh start on a new team lets him grow past that. So, evidnetly, was Doug Wilson…

So I’ll give the Sharks off-season a B for now. Ask me again ten games into the regular season.