Anniversaries V: Bugsy's new shoes

November 20, 1980 was a Thursday of course, it being exactly one "solar cycle" ago (28 years = 7 leap cycles). It seems like a long time ago but what goes around comes around; there are some interesting parallels between Oiler teams then and now.

In those days the Oilers played most of their midweek home games on Wednesday. 28 years ago yesterday was another such game, an utterly forgettable 6-4 loss to Vancouver, remarakable for just one thing: it was the end of the short coaching career of Bugsy Watson.

In the fall of 1980 Glen Sather was assuming the reins of GM with the departure of Larry Gordon. His first job was to replace himself as coach. In the brash Bryan Watson, Sather saw a lot that reminded him of himself. Both had lengthy NHL careers because they were as long in guile and gamesmanship as they were short in actual talent. A good comparable for Watson among mondern players would be the guy who now wears Bugsy's old #18 for Red Wings, Kirk Maltby, with a little Jerkko Ruutu thrown in for good measure.

Watson's most famous accomplishment was his shadowing of Bobby Hull in the 1966 playoffs in which Bugsy drove Bobby beyond distraction and into revenge mode. Hull had killed in the Wings the previous year's playoffs, and in this, the fourth consecutive Hawks-Wings semi-final Wings coach Sid Abel unleashed his skating pit bull with the single task of taking down Hull. Which he did, with both scoring twice in the series while conducting an ongoing tong war. Wings won in six.

In his classic book on those 1980-81 Oilers, The Game of Our Lives, Peter Gzowski wrote:

'Just a few months earlier, Watson had seemed the perfect man to put some toughness and fire in the Oilers. He must have been one of the most voracious competitors ever to have played the game. Small (five-ten) and stocky -- he played at 170 pounds -- he set league records for penalties; until Dave "The Hammer" Schultz came along to lead Philadelphia's Broad Street Bullies in the 1970s, he was the most penalized player in NHL history, with 2,212 minutes -- more than thirty-six full games -- in the box. Yet no one regarded him as a bully, or an intimidator. He shared many of Sather's characteristics as a player; in a book called The Violent Game, the American sporrtswriter Gary Ronberg singled out the two of them. Ronberg described them as "relatively small rogues," and went on to write that, "They intimidate few players, but have a knack for unnerving them with an impertinent word or gesture, an annoying slash or cross-check. When they fight, it is usually against a bigger and stronger man, but the mismatch is in one sense an advantage -- little men are usually beaten, and when they manage to avoid a thrashing it seems like a victory."

'Although Watson played with nine different teams in his seventeen years in the league, the most vivid memory most fans have of him was as the Detroit Red Wing who stuck so closely to Bobby Hull in a 1966 playoff series... The tactic, sending one defensive specialist out to hobble a superstar, was not new at the time but no one had seen it used to this degree before, and it drove Hull to distraction. As a result of punishment he received in the course of that and other assignments, Watson's face looks like that of a battered pug. The bridge of his nose is concave; scar tissue crinkles over both eyes. He looks, as his nickname Bugsy suggests, like some small-time hood in a Hollywood gangster movie. For all that, though, there is a boyish vitality about his rearranged features, despite their brutish history. Women find him inordinately attractive.'

The Oilers had finished with a flourish the previous season under Sather's tutelage, grabbing the last playoff spot with a late surge and playing the first-overall Flyers tough in a surprisingly close first-round series. But the second year they struggled out of the gate. "Veterans" of the previous season included Wayne Gretzky, Mark Messier, Kevin Lowe, Dave Hunter, Dave Lumley, Dave Semenko: still young and developing players who were subject to ebbs and flows in their physical, mental and emotional games. In this sense they weren't too different from the modern group of Sam Gagner, Andrew Cogliano, Tom Gilbert, Kyle Brodziak, Marc Pouliot, Zack Stortini, all of whom are struggling with the burden of higher expectations after the giddy heights of last spring. And their coach is struggling tight along with them.

In '80-81 the young Oilers and their coach struggled right out of the gate. Gzowski again:

'On his first road trip as coach, Watson was having difficulty adjusting the social distance he felt he ought to maintain from the players. For seventeen years he had been one of the boys; now, he missed the fraternity. Executive robes did not rest easily on his shoulders ... At the morning practive in Buffalo after their defeat by the Sabres, he had felt out of cointrol of the team. At least one player,who had apparently not settled for just a beer after the game, smelled of booze in the morning. Watson was angry with them, and disappointed.'

By mid-November the team had struggled to a 4-9-5 start, winning just one of 10 home games (a big one, the first ever Battle of Alberta which Oilers won 5-3 on two goals from Dave Semenko). Other than one frustrating run of 4 consecutive ties during a 6-game homestand -- no overtime in those days -- other home games were even more frustrating losses, many of them to mediocre opposition. In 6 home games the squad had scored 4 goals and failed to win.

Sather, whose patience with his players was legendary, wasn't satisfied with what his friend Bugsy was getting out of them. After that 6-4 loss to the ever-mediocre Canucks he had seen enough. With Peter Pocklington's blessing, Slats turned to the one guy he had the utmost confidence in: himself. That weekend, with the local press congregated in Toronto for the Eskimos' annual Grey Cup victory, Bugsy was fitted with cement shoes and quickly sank out of sight.

Sather: "The most important thing is the team. If my own brother was coaching this club, or playing on it, and it wasn't working out, I'd let him go too."

Although they predictably won the next game, 6-3 over Buffalo, Oilers continued to struggle under Sather. They posted an even worse 4-12-1 W-L-T mark in his first 17 games and made the turn at New Year at 8-21-6, before making a second half surge that took them right into the second round of the playoffs where they were eliminated by the defending champion Islanders. Sather had established firm control of the team and continued in the dual role (later becoming club president as well) as the team blossomed into a powerhouse and ultimately, a dynasty.
***

Historical footnote: The Grey Cup weekend firing was a time-honoured NHL tradition. Half a century ago, in a situation that closely parallels the Sather-Watson situation, Punch Imlach fired Billy Reay during Grey Cup weekend 1958 and became GM-coach of the Leafs. As described by sportwriter Scott Young (Neil's dad) in his own terrific book, The Leafs I Knew:

'November 26, Vancouver. Here for the Grey Cup. Sad but not much surprised to get the news that Billy Reay had been fired as the Leafs' coach and that Imlach would take over for the time being. What a bunch of cunning so-and-sos. They wait until every Toronto sports columnist is three thousand miles away covering the Grey Cup, and sports pages are all full of Grey Cup, and they fire Reay.

'Not that we could have changed the situation. But we might have put the finger on a few people who deserve to share the blame -- and do it before most fans forget, which generally takes about 48 hours; or until the next hockey game.'

Those '58-59 Leafs also went on a late season run to scrape into the playoffs, then made it through to the second round (then known as the Stanley Cup Finals) where they were eliminated by the defending champion Canadiens. Imlach too had established firm control as his team blossomed into a powerhouse cum dynasty.

In both cases the team was still 3+ seasons away at the time of the Grey Cup firing, but once they won the Cup they held onto it for awhile. Both Punch Imlach and Glen Sather won four Stanleys in the dual role. And Billy Reay and Bugsy Watson became historical footnotes in their own right.

Oilers 7, Blue Jackets 2 -- player gradings

I have offered to assist in David Staples' latest project over at Cult of Hockey, namely to grade the Oilers' players on a game-by-game basis. This is a collective effort, I'm just one member of a team of markers. Last night's Columbus game was my first contribution to the cause.

The scoring system is as follows: 10, perfect game; 9, extraordinary game; 8, great game; 7, good game; 6, above average game; 5, average game; 4, below average game; 3, bad game; 2, terrible game; 1, trade this player or send him to the minors.
***

Oilers 7, Columbus 2. A strange night in which Oilers were outshot 39-19 yet won in a laugher. Despite the offensive support Dwayne Roloson was the key performer frustrating the Jackets time and again. As they pressed they became vulnerable to the counter attack, and the Oilers made their chances count with some outstanding execution in the offensive zone. Nearly a perfect night on special teams, with the powerplay effectively going 3-for-3 (with one goal coming 6 seconds after the expiry of a penalty), and the PK unit killing a creditable 6 out of 7. Dustin Penner was an inspired presence on his return from the press box. A huge turnaround win for the Oil after three consecutive losses including two blowouts in regulation.
***

Shawn Horcoff – 8: A complete game from Oilers’ most complete player. 4 shots, 3 points, 2 blocked shots, 1 takeaway, a winning night in the faceoff circle. 23:21 TOI including major contributions to both special teams.

Robert Nilsson – 5: Decent game, not a major factor. Just missed the top corner with a wicked rising shot in the first period that an inch the other way would have made the highlight reels.

Andrew Cogliano – 7: Flying all night. A goal, an assist, +2. Had a couple penalties, one dreadful turnover and just 31% in the circle, but the good outweighed the bad by a lot.

Ethan Moreau – 6: The lone minus forward on the team, but contributed mightily to a good night for the PK, and a solid night defensively with 3 hits, 3 blocks, and a takeaway. Questionable decisions with the puck at times.

Steve Staios – 5: Am not liking Steve’s game much of late, but he came up with some big blocks and contributed to a shaky but mostly successful PK unit. Was on the ice for both Columbus goals and none for the Oilers.

Erik Cole – 5: Had some nice puck battles on the boards, had a secondary assist but really didn’t bring much offence to the table. Didn’t even attempt a shot. 0:00 on both special teams, just 13:18 ice time at even strength.

Dustin Penner – 8: Tempted to give a 9. An exceptional performance from the gentle giant in his 200th NHL game. Responded to his benching with his best game as an Oiler, scoring once and contributing directly to three other goals with his massive presence in front of the net. 3 shots, 3 hits, +2, and a thorn in Pascal Leclaire’s side all night long.

Jesse Boulerice – no grade: Scoresheet says he played all of 2:27 with a complete blank in all stats, but the only time I even noticed him was when he was late to the party on a post-whistle scrum.

Dwayne Roloson – 8: Outstanding performance from the veteran playing his 3rd game in 4 nights, facing 112 shots overall. 37 saves for the second night in a row, many of them top notch. Best penalty killer on the team.

Denis Grebeshkov – 6: Seen him good, seen him bad, seen him both at once. Made some real nice high skill plays getting the puck moving in the right direction. Lost a battle to Nash on the 4-2 goal and nearly got burned later in the same shift by Umberger but Roli saved his bacon.

Jason Strudwick – 5: Looks very much like a 7th defenceman. Just a little slow reacting to the puck at times. -1 on Huselius’s goal, but contributed almost 5:00 without a GA on the PK so gets a bare passing grade.

Sheldon Souray – 8: Displayed his booming shot with an unstoppable goal and a rocket off the bar. Beautiful pass to Cogliano for another goal. Was major contributor to both special teams, and finished the night +3 at evens. Was on the ice for 5 goals for and none against. Unnecessary penalty that led to Nash’s goal was his lone blemish.

Kyle Brodziak – 5: Tough night for the kid saddled with Boulerice. Only 8:09 ice time, half of it on the PK. Someone referred to him as a “defensive specialist” but he’s still very much a project in this role.

Lubomir Visnovsky – 7: Tidy night’s work, goal and an assist, +2. Some very nice work with the puck, good positional play, 3 blocked shots. Played with Grebeshkov in the latter part of the game as MacTavish put Gilbert with Souray at both even strength and the first unit PP. That experiment was a major success.

Tom Gilbert – 8: Probably played his best game of the season, a goal, a helper, +3, and 3 blocked shots. Looked composed with the puck when under pressure, a trademark of Tom’s A game, and broke the puck out of his end well.

Marc Pouliot – 7: Finally broke the ice with his first goal of the year which stood up as the game winner. Impressed me with his all-ice game, some real smart plays with the puck in his own end. Also made a "hero play" behind Roloson One of 5 Oilers with 3 blocked shots.

Ales Hemsky – 7: Earned his marks on the PP where he set up two goals, and a third just after the expiry of the Jackets’ last penalty. Was pretty ordinary at even strength otherwise. His turnover at the Columbus blueline late in the second let to Huselius goal that cut the margin to 3-1.

Liam Reddox – 6: Lots to like in this kid. Has good defensive awareness, and lots of try. One of 4 Oilers with 3 hits. Looked alright on the PK though’ was on the ice for the one PPGA.

Sam Gagner – 6: A little better showing for Sam after a very rough stretch. Finished with 2 assists, +2. Made a good play to lead the rush before Penner’s 5-2 goal that ended any doubt. No shots on goal.

Craig MacTavish – 8: The beleaguered coach made all the right calls on this night, bringing Penner into the lineup and inserting him back on the powerplay unit; switching up the top two defence pairings and finding some immediate chemistry; and especially with coming back with Roloson on a night where the armchair experts, yours truly included, thought it was a poor idea to ride the veteran. Roli proved us wrong, and MacT right, with a first star performance.

Clogging up the ice -- an NHL directive

It's axiomatic that "the ice is smaller" these days. Players are both bigger and faster, taking away both time and space -- precious commodities that even the cleverest scorers need to make their mark. While the dimensions of the NHL rink have remained constant at 200'x85', the growth of the 'average' player has been ongoing, and rapid. (I have no stats, but I'd guess and extra inch and 10 pounds every 15-20 years) A player who begins his career a big man will be much closer to the mid-point by the time he's finished.

What has the NHL done to combat this? The league's history of rule changes with respect to manpower situations is more than a little revealing. My trusty NHL Official Guide and Record Book (Major Rule Changes, pp. 10-11) confirms (most of) a sorry trend that has been occurring throughout my lifetime of increasing 'free substitution' for penalized players, resulting in more players on the ice:
***

1925-26: 'Delayed penalty rules introduced. Each team must have a minimum of four players on the ice at all times.' OK, I'll admit this one wasn't during my lifetime. A team with three or more penalties can only be two men short.

Consequences: No more 5v2 or 4v2 powerplays. Referees become terrified of calling that third penalty no matter what, because it means a long boring conversation with an uncomprehending local timekeeper about who can come out of the box when.
***

1956-57: 'Player serving a minor penalty allowed to return to the ice when a [powerplay] goal is scored by opposing team.' The 'Montreal Canadiens Rule', meant to somewhat derail the Habs' devastating powerplay. I can probably pinpoint the exact occasion that precipitated this change, which is mentioned elsewhere in the Guide - actually, in the Record Book: November 5, 1955, Jean Béliveau scores three powerplay goals in 44 seconds. All three are assisted by Bert Olmstead. (Both are second, to Bill Mosienko and Gus Bodnar respectively, who combined for a hat trick in just 21 seconds in 1952, although I'm almost certain no powerplay was involved that time.) By season's end Béliveau leads the league in goals (47) and points (88); Olmstead in assists (a record 56). More importantly the emerging Habitant powerhouse wins the Prince of Wales Trophy (then the equivalent of the President's Trophy) by an astonishing 24 points before rolling to their first of five straight Cups. They're too good! They must be stopped at all costs. Let's fiddle with the rules.

Consequences: Players who might think twice about taking what the soccer commentators call a 'professional foul' to prevent a goal-scoring opportunity no longer need to factor in that the penalty might cost his team more than the imminent goal. Now it's a 'good' penalty to take away even a 20% scoring opportunity and turn matters over to an 85% PK unit. The worst result either way is one goal against, a break-even proposition. And when a PP goal is scored, there's one more player allowed on the ice.
***

1966-67: 'Substitution allowed on coincident major penalties.' A biggie. Before this every fight resulted in a five-minute 4v4. Better yet, a multi-player brawl could result in five minutes of 3v3 action. It was a wonderful self-cleaning mechanism for ugly games - the ice opened up right away, and it became a skill and skating game far away from the boards. The action was often pulsating; a failed 2-on-1 at one end could lead to an immediate 2-on-1 going the other way. Mobile defencemen like Pierre Pilote and speedy two-way forwards like Dave Keon and Henri Richard excelled.

Consequences: Two to four more players on the ice for long stretches of 5 or even 10 minutes after fights/brawls. 3v3 went the way of the dinosaurs. No wait a minute, the dinosaurs were alive and well, running the NHL even then. 3v3 went the way of the unicorn. The dwindling few of us who remember that kind of open-ice magic are written off as demented whiners for the 'good old days', or more likely, ignored completely.
***

Late 1970s: (not in the book, so apparently not a 'major' change. I'll paraphrase): Substitution allowed on coincidental minors where manpower is already unequal. A 4v3 powerplay was (and remains) a far better opportunity than a 5v4, so if the team on the powerplay could somehow induce coincidental penalties they would greatly improve their chances of scoring. Call this the 'Philadelphia Flyers Rule', because the B.S. Bullies were renowned for this tactic. Their willing and able accomplices, the referees, aided and abetted their cause by being far more willing to call simultaneous penalties than stand alone penalties in a scrum. The obvious question, 'which foul causes the coincidental minors, the initiation or retaliation?', is never addressed. The solution of dealing with Philly's bullying tactics when a man up by issuing them the only penalty in a needless scrum, apparently never occurs to tiny dinosaur brains.

Consequences: Fewer 4v3 powerplays, no matter how legitimate and even the altercation might be. Two more players on the ice in such situations.
***

1985-86: 'Substitutions allowed in the event of coincidental minor penalties.' Another biggie. The 'Edmonton Oilers Rule' was a Calgary plot masterminded by Cliff Fletcher to slow down the Oilers, no matter what the cost to the game. I was outraged at the time that it was proposed, apoplectic when it got adopted, incensed and appalled when it actually worked (Calgary won a memorable playoff series that very year, largely by gooning it up without fear of open ice consequences), and I remain to this day adamantly opposed to this idea which attacked one of the fundamentals of the game. Like the Canadiens three decades before, the Oilers found a way to continue to dominate, even without their (ahem) 'unfair advantage'. (They still had their other unfair advantage, better players.) But the game suffered dearly.

Consequences: Way more players on the ice, two guys for two minutes every time the rule is invoked (which is frequently). For seven years I undertook the exercise of figuring at the first face-off after coincidental penalties, which players wouldn't be on the ice if the penalties had to be served, and invariably it was the 'third guy high', defensive forwards, the guys whose bloody job is to clog up the ice. The Oilers, who gave up tons of goals 4v4 but scored even more, could no longer turn every missed two-man attack into a 3-on-2 (typically Coffey with either Gretzky-Kurri or Messier-Anderson) going the other way. That's much too exciting. They're too good! They must be stopped at all costs. Let's fiddle with the rules.
***

1992-93: 'No substitutions allowed in the event of coincidental minor penalties called when both teams are at full strength.' A lame attempt to 'fix' the mistake of 1985-86. (The two rule changes, radical and corrective, should be considered as one moderate change IMO)

Consequences: A significant improvement, but in the NHL's typically half-assed manner it only goes partway. It results in 4v4 opportunities when exactly two minors are called. If three occur, the powerplay is not a 4v3, it's the sameoldsameold 5v4. When two penalties occur to each team, it's no longer two minutes of 3v3, or in the event of 4 minutes to one player and 2 to two different opponents two minutes of 4v3 one way followed by both guys jumping out of the box simultaneously to make it a 5v4 the other way. All of those manpower options have been excised from the game. I don't think I have seen 20 minutes of 3v3 action in the last 20 years, and I watch my share of hockey.
***

1999-2000: Again paraphrasing a truly minor change (goes to intent, Your Honour). If a team killing a 3v4 penalty in overtime takes a second penalty, the other team gets to ADD a player. While a necessary tinker to the 4v4 OT rule also brought in that season, only in Gary Bettman's NHL would a penalty result in more players on the ice than before.

In Bettman's 'defence', all the other rule changes above preceded his It-Only-Seems-Like-Forever tenure. On the (criminal) 'offence' side of Bettman's ledger, he was in a 'more is more' mood that year, awarding a free point to all teams who could score in overtime, without commensurate cost to the team that allowed said overtime goal. That and 4v4 action sure opened up overtime, at the heavy cost of much more clogging of the ice in regulation time (which of course is at least 92.3% of every game, but hey, he's a basketball guy, who needs an exciting game when you can have an exciting finish?)

Consequences: Very little, two-man advantages are rare in overtime. But this wrinkle exposes the lack of continuity in the 'gimmick' of 4v4 overtime, as Bettman & Co. toy with the fundamentals of the game.
***

Commentary: The game of hockey was originally designed so that teams have to face multiple manpower situations: 5v5, 5v4, 5v3, 4v5, 4v4, 4v3, 3v5, 3v4, and 3v3, plus various goalie-out scenarios. But with the exception of the partial fix of 1992, all substitution rules (including a few I didn't mention that gradually reduced the manpower disadvantage consequences of a match penalty) have been in the direction of more players on the ice, not fewer, including the virtual eradication of the most exciting variation of even-but-not-full strength, the 3v3 . The NHL is clogging up its own ice with its short-sighted league policies and knee-jerk 'they must be stopped at all costs' rule changes.

The greatest fear in Gary Bettman's NHL is that rather than look for precedents within the league's own history -- with which the league's current brain trust [sic] is frightfully out of touch -- they will attempt some new massive "fix" like full-time 4v4 hockey to open up the ice. To which my response would be "No, no, a thousand times no!" There is nothing like good old-fashioned 5v5 hockey, and the permanent loss of a player might virtually eliminate the physical aspect of the game that most fans love. (When was the last time you saw a big hit in overtime?) I'd just like to see the penalty substitution rules revisited so the full variety of manpower situations would occur more frequently.

Playoff game day -- Eskimos at Montreal

Since it worked pretty well week, I will again be hosting a game day thread for Saturday's televised CFL playoff game.
Pregame show at 10 a.m. MST, game at 11. I'll be watching the game alone most likely, and would love a little company. Please drop in and feel welcome to contribute your comments. Anybody among my tiny readership who might actually be going to the game, as DoritoGrande did last week?
***
***
On Saturday morning the Eskimos attempt to win their very first Eastern Conference championship. By virtue of their good result in WINNERpeg last weekend, Edmonton has already achieved the distinction of being the first such interloper to win their way in to the "other" conference final.

The Eskimos have encountered Montreal in the playoffs before, of course, just not until the Grey Cup, the logical time for the twain to meet. Theirs is among the most storied rivalries in Grey Cup history, beginning with Jackie Parker's return of Chuck Hunsinger's fumble in the 1954 game (pictured at right) leading to Ol' Spaghetti Legs getting his sure hands on the Grey cup (pictured above). The two teams established conference-dominating powerhouses in the mid-1950s (3 straight Grey Cup encounters, all Edmonton wins), mid-to-late 1970s (5 Grey Cup meetings in 6 years, with the Esks winning 3) and early 2000s (3 Grey Cup meetings in 4 years, Esks winning 2). Fully half of Edmonton's 22 Grey Cup appearances have come against the Alouettes, with the Esks holding a tidy 8-3 lead in the series. Two of those games occurred right in the Big Owe, with the Alouettes winning the infamous Staples Game (no, not you David) in 1977 and the Esks winning fair and square in '79.

All of which history means squat today, especially since this isn't even the Grey Cup, it's just on the road there. But it's a fact that the Big Game will held in the same Olympic Stadium a week later. There's a lot of pressure on the host of the Grey Cup to actually get there, and lots of distractions. Should things go awry in the must-win game that precedes it, a lot of Grey Cup tickets become available for below market value. :)

There are precedents: in 1987, the Eskimos won both the western final and the Grey Cup in Vancouver; and in 1993 the Esks won both in McMahon Stadium. Those were particularly sweet championships: a big upset win in the conference final, moving into the beaten hosts own "home conference" dressing room, then upholding the West's honour in the title game to, uh, muted applause.

Can history repeat?

Remembering the Man

when my father died

it was like a whole library

had burned

down

-- Laurie Anderson

Every Remembrance Day in my life I have taken a few moments to think of my father. I have always made a point of calling him, but this year he is beyond contact. My personal library burned down a year ago this month.

Dad was a peaceful, people person who left his family farm in rural Nova Scotia at age 18 to enlist in the Royal Canadian Air Force. After a year of training in Ontario he served overseas in the last two years of World War II. Luckily for me he made it back in one piece, otherwise I wouldn't be around to write this.

Dad was many things to many people. I touched on some of his many interests in dedicating a published article to his memory in which I described him as a "family man, educator, community leader, WW II veteran, music lover, sports fan, and stroke unit volunteer". Since this blog is mostly about sports, I’ll just focus on that aspect of him here.

There were a few things about Dad that never wavered in the 52 years I knew him: he loved his country, he loved my mother, he loved the Toronto Maple Leafs and he loved the St. Louis (baseball) Cardinals. His watershed year was 1942, the year he met Mum, enlisted in the air force, and cemented his love of the two sports franchises that both happened to win their respective championships.

While training in Toronto, Dad finally got the chance to see the Leafs play. He bought a seat in the "greys", the upper reaches of Maple Leaf Gardens, for some ridiculous price like 70 cents. The last time I saw Dad, 65 years later, he spoke of this experience and still remembered the kindness of a total stranger who saw a man in uniform and brought him down to the reds to see the champs up close.

In those days Toronto had a ball team, also named the Maple Leafs, in the International League. Tickets were cheap and accessible so Dad went to a number of games. His favourite story, which he never tired of re-re-retelling, was of the time manager (and former major league star pitcher) Burleigh Grimes spit tobacco juice on an umpire. Dad loved a good rhubarb.

Dad's sporting heroes of those days were not just athletes but men of the first rank. Syl Apps was a clean-cut all-Canadian, an Olympian and a hockey star who, like many NHLers, interrupted his career to go overseas. Dad always had all day for players who did that regardless of their team affiliation, and he had particularly fond memories of Boston's unfortunately-named "Kraut Line" of Milt Schmidt, Woody Dumart, and Bobby Bauer who left the Stanley Cup champion Bruins late in the 1941-42 season to enlist in the RCAF together, subsequently missing over three seasons before reuniting after the war. According to Dad the RCAF had one heck of a hockey club during his time in training.

Similarly Dad had a tremendous amount of respect for Ted Williams, the oft-controversial, now cryogenic baseball star. The Splendid Splinter interrupted his storied career not once but twice to fight in WWII and the Korean war, shaving five prime years off a legendary career whose counting numbers (2654 hits, 521 homers) are still awesome but much less impressive than they should be.

But of all Dad's sporting heroes the one who remained highest on the pedestal was Stan Musial (statued, above). Stan the Man took the major leagues by storm, hitting .426 during a September call-up in 1941 before delivering the first of 16 consecutive seasons of .310 or better in 1942 when the Cards won the pennant and, to Dad's delight, upset the always-favoured Yankees in the World Series. The Cards would win the pennant again in 1943, 1944 and 1946, the gap explained by Musial's own absence in the Navy that caused him to miss the 1945 season. He returned to cop his second MVP award in '46 before leading the Cards to a thrilling 7-game squeaker over Ted Williams and the Red Sox. Dad never tired of telling -- and I never tired of hearing -- the story of Enos Slaughter scoring the winning run all the way from first base on a single, as Red Sox shortstop Johnny Pesky held the ball for an extra second, not realizing that Slaughter was not stopping at third. Amazingly, Pesky is still active in baseball, a bench coach for the Red Sox. I saw the occasion that he was honoured this past season and thought of Dad.

In 1948 Musial had one of the great seasons in baseball history, leading the National League in every hitting category except home runs, where his 39 dingers came up one short of the league leaders Ralph Kiner and Johnny Mize. The difference between Stan the Man and the Triple Crown was a homer that got wiped off the books by a subsequent rain-out.

It is interesting to note that modern baseball metrics applied retroactively to historic figures reveal Musial to be one of the most underrated of baseball's great stars. According to Wikipedia:

"The rise of Bill James and the extensive use of sabermetrics has enhanced Musial's credentials as not only one of the greatest of his generation, but of all baseball history. At Baseball-Reference.com, Musial is consistent among the various test leaders: He ranks fifth all-time among hitters according to the Black Ink Test (behind Babe Ruth, Ty Cobb, Rogers Hornsby, and Ted Williams), third all-time on the Gray Ink Test (behind Cobb and Hank Aaron), tied with Barry Bonds for second in the Hall of Fame Career Standards Test, behind only Ruth, and ranks first among all hitters and pitchers on the Hall of Fame Monitor Test. Surprisingly, despite his towering reputation with statistic-based aficionados of the game, many common fans are unaware of his achievements, leading ESPN and other organizations to list him as the most underrated athlete of all-time"

Dad had the occasion to see Musial in person a few times over the years, notably a doubleheader against the Braves in Milwaukee County Stadium that the Cards swept, winning the nightcap on a Musial homer in extra innings. A few years later our entire family, en route from St. John's to Edmonton, gathered in that same stadium to see the same two teams meet. I was never quite sure if that was a lucky accident of timing, but it sure worked out. Musial was in his last great season, hitting .330 at age 41, but that day was rested, making a late-inning appearance as a pinch hitter. I was just 6 years old, and I remember Dad saying "Pay attention, you'll want to remember this" and I still do, more the moment than the outcome. There was a buzz in the stadium as one of the game's great gentlemen (3,026 GP, 0 ejections) took his place in the batter's box.

I never saw another live major league ball game with Dad but I can't tell you how many we watched on TV. We both loved the play-by-play commentary of former Cardinal Dizzy Dean and his sidekick Peewee Reese on the Game of the Week, perhaps the most unconventional broadcast team in television history. Dizzy took special delight when the pitcher got a hit, and when the game got boring he would take to singing "The Wabash Cannonball" in the late innings. He was also famous for such twisted commentary as, "I'm telling you Peewee, this here pitcher has just throwed up five straight curves."

In the fall of '63 Dad somehow managed to procure four of the hottest tickets in town and took us to an exhibition hockey game between the Toronto Maple Leafs and the San Francisco Seals of the old Western League. We boys were all Leaf fans in those days; I had watched my first serious hockey the previous spring as the first-place Leafs rolled through the playoffs to their second of three straight Stanley Cups. So this was our own chance to see the champs up close. It was something of a barnstorming tour as the teams were playing themselves into shape Original 6 style, but the whole team was there and large as life just 8 rows or so down on the big ice surface of the Edmonton Gardens. No masks or helmets either, just the well-known faces of Johnny Bower, Tim Horton, Allan Stanley, Dave Keon, Red Kelly, Dick Duff, Bob Pulford, George Armstrong, Frank Mahovlich ... the most Hall of Famers I've ever seen on one team to this day. Of course the NHL proper was not even on Edmonton's radar at that point.

Dad and I did see a lot of football together. After our family's permanent move to Edmonton in 1971 we got season's tickets to the Eskimos from 1972 to 1983, stretching exactly from Tom Wilkinson's arrival in Edmonton to Warren Moon's departure and encompassing the greatest dynasty in CFL history. Too many tales for this already rambling essay, but the highest moment was probably the Fog Bowl, the 1973 Western final in which the lead changed hands six times in the second half before the Eskimos pulled it out 25-23 over the Green Riders on a late touchdown catch by Dad's favourite Esk, George McGowan.

In later years I had the opportunity to repay a small portion of my vast debt. I took Dad to a couple of WHA games after Gretzky arrived, and Dad recognized instantly what an extraordinary talent he was. He attended a few games here and there in the early NHL years, including what remains the finest regular season game I have ever seen, a 4-3 Oiler win over the champion Islanders in December of 1981. Gretzky set up the first three goals before scoring the winner with 1:02 to play, his 33rd in 32 games, keeping him ahead of Rocket Richard's 50 in 50 pace. Little did we know that later that month he would utterly destroy that record, but that Islanders' conquest might have been his best game of that entire season. Gretzky's game winner was hardly the end of the drama that night, as in the dying seconds the Islanders' bid for a tying goal was denied by a goal line save by Kevin Lowe.

A year and a half later I was able to score an extra ticket for Game 1 of the 1983 Stanley Cup Finals, the only SCF game Dad ever attended. That was the "Billy Smith game", in which Battlin' Billy made a 1-0 lead stand up from the sixth minute through the 60th, blanking the high powered Oilers with an evil admixture of great goaltending, goal posts, stick wielding, head games, and black magic. Results be damned, it was a great game, the best of that series, and vaulted the Islanders to their fourth and final title.

As I used to bug Dad, he remained a Leaf fan in the regular season but an Oiler fan in the playoffs. There wasn't a whole lot of reason for conflict, and when the two played one another in mostly meaningless contests we went our separate ways with good cheer.

Things took a serious turn for the worse in February 1984 when Dad suffered a major stroke that seriously disabled and nearly killed him. The doctors held out little hope for his future quality of life but he persevered and beat the odds by relearning to walk and talk. He was forced to retire from his job, but turned to volunteer work while maintaining his great loves of music, politics, and sports. Despite great difficulties in speaking he remained a people person whose positive attitude towards life was an inspiration to all who knew him.

Dad continued to follow the Cards, Leafs, Oilers, and Eskimos mostly on TV, and took great delight in the Oilers Stanley Cup triumphs in the subsequent years. Our season ticket days were done, but I was able to take him to a very occasional sporting event. It took great effort on his part so we really had to pick our spots. Eventually he and Mum left the snow and ice of Edmonton for the milder climes of Victoria, but our regular phone conversations would always turn to the latest developments in the world of sports. While the Leafs never did come around, the Cards developed another powerhouse in the current decade. Dad became a huge fan of Albert Pujols who continued the tradition of great Cardinals like Dizzy Dean, Stan Musial, Bob Gibson, Lou Brock, and Ozzie Smith. To our delight, the Cards pulled off an unlikely World Series win in 2006, a few months after the Oilers had come oh-so-close to doing likewise. I still recall the phone ringing within minutes of the final out, my Dad's halting voice delivering the words I knew were coming: "The Cardinals have won the World Series!" His once booming voice was weakened by the stroke, but he was triumphant. I silently thanked the baseball gods that he had lived to see that day.

A year later he was gone, a week before Remembrance Day. He had lived his life to the fullest right up to his last days at age 83, having lived on borrowed time and made the most of it for 23 years. A brain scan taken in his last days showed fully a third of his brain had been ravaged by the stroke; the doctor was astonished by what this determined man had accomplished with what was left.

A year has past and on Remembrance Day I again reflect on the most important man in my life. I can't pick up the phone and call him, a particularly bitter pill today of all days. But I think of him often. On Saturday night I watched the Hall of Fame game, and thought of how he would have loved seeing his Leafs put the hurt on the Habs 6-3. I thought of how he would have delighted at the sight of Glenn Anderson, one of his favourite Oilers, finally get the recognition he deserved. And I thought of how he would have thrilled to see Gaye Stewart, who he had seen play for the Leafs that fall of 1942. Stewart would win the Calder Trophy that season before giving the next two years for his country, just as Dad had done. And I thought of how Dad would have wept at Stewart's beautifully composed reading of "In Flanders Fields". I know I did.

Lest we forget.

"Scouting" a Hall of Famer -- two ancient game reports

My first view of Glenn Anderson occurred sometime during the 1978-79 season, when the University of Denver brought their fine hockey team to Edmonton for an exhibition game against the University of Alberta Golden Bears. The Bears were in the second of a three-year run as national champions, perhaps the best team ever iced by this long-standing dynasty of Canadian university sport, their line-up featuring future NHLers like Don Spring, Dave Hindmarch, and their captain and CIAU Player of the Year Randy Gregg.

While I was keen to see how the Bears fared against a top NCAA team, I also went to this game with scouting aforethought. The Pioneers’ roster featured Ken Berry, a draft choice of the then-WHA Oilers and brother of Doug Berry who was breaking in with the Oilers that very season. Little did I know that a childhood friend of the Berrys would be the true find. Or as I said to my seatmate more than once that night: “Berry looks pretty good, but who in the heck is this # 9 ?!” Glenn Anderson was flying on the always-excellent Varsity (now Clare Drake) Arena ice, and made a very positive impression despite being blanked along with his mates in a 2-0 Bears victory.

One person who was likely in the building and certainly paying attention was Lorne Davis. That summer the Oilers drafted Anderson, in the fourth round, 69th overall, in the best ever Entry Draft class of 1979. Oilers’ first three picks, Kevin Lowe, Mark Messier, and Anderson, would go on to win six Stanley Cups together, five of them right here in Edmonton. I remember being thrilled on draft day that I had actually seen two of the guys we picked – Messier and Anderson – during the previous season. I had no problem remembering Anderson’s exciting pell-mell dashes towards goal, and was honestly excited that this was a great pick by the newly-reinvented NHL Oilers.

The following season Andy was back in the same arena, which is hockey’s version of Renfrew/John Ducey Park – hard on the rear end, but a wonderful place to see a game. This time the Bears’ opposition was Canada’s Olympic team that was barnstorming the country in preparation for the Lake Placid Olympics. Father David Bauer’s revised dream team was coached by Drake with assistance from Tom Watt and one Lorne Davis. In fact Team Canada featured six players from that Denver-Alberta exhibition game: Gregg, Spring, Hindmarch, John Devaney, Berry and Anderson. It also featured at least four guys who would go on to play for the Edmonton Oilers: Gregg, Anderson, Berry and (trivia fans take note) netminder Bob Dupuis.

Even though the Bears’ roster had been ravaged by “defections” to the Olympic team, they were no spent force. Drake’s assistant Billy Moores stepped to the forefront and guided a team with 11 newcomers to a third consecutive national championship. On this night they gave Team Canada one of their best games on their season long tour, handing the Red Maple Leaf a rare loss in a spirited 4-3 affair.

While there was lots of story lines and some great hockey to enjoy that night, the apple of my eye was Anderson, now a full-fledged Oilers prospect and clearly one of the stars of Canada's first Olympic hockey team in 12 years. He had an outstanding game, scoring once, setting up another, finding iron at least once while creating one great scoring opportunity after another with his speed, puck-carrying and fearlessness. He was not yet a polished finisher in those days, it took him about a year at the NHL level before his brain caught up to his feet in the scoring area. But man, did he make things happen.

I won’t dwell on Glenn’s NHL career in this post, other than to say that at 20 he was one of the most well-rounded and NHL-ready rookies I’ve ever seen, thanks in large part to that year under Drake, Watt, and Davis. Anderson would emerge as one of the earliest and most successful graduates of Hockey Canada’s Program of Excellence, as will finally be confirmed tonight when he finally receives the highest individual honour the game can bestow.

From the archives: The campaign to elect Glenn Anderson

Date: November 13, 2006

To: Hockey Hall of Fame

From: Bruce

Re: The compelling case for Glenn Anderson

When Wayne Gretzky retired in the spring of 1999, the NHL decided to honour him in a multitude of ways, including immediate induction into the Hockey Hall of Fame. The decision to waive the customary three-year waiting period was not unprecedented, so the further decision was taken that the Great One should enter the Hall of Fame alone, since anybody else's accomplishments and, especially, statistics would pale in comparison.

Lost in the Gretzky spotlight yet again was one Glenn Anderson, another Oilers superstar of the 80s who had retired in 1996. Under normal circumstances Anderson would have been first considered for the HHoF in 1999, instead he was put off to 2000 to compete with a second graduating class. And he's been put off ever since.

Tonight Dick Duff becomes the 10th NHL forward to enter the HHoF since 2000. Duff was an excellent role player on two mini-dynasties, the Leafs of the early 60s and the Habs of the late 60s. Duff's statistics are well below HHoF standards, but he has the deserved reputation as a clutch player, and is the first of those ten inductees to have equalled Glenn Anderson's total of six Stanley Cups. So certainly Duff was a worthy candidate, if a borderline inductee.

Anderson compares very well to that entire group of 10 forwards, who include Joe Mullen, Denis Savard, Mike Gartner, Dale Hawerchuk, Jari Kurri, Bernie Federko, Clark Gillies, Pat Lafontaine, Cam Neely, and Duff. Compare Anderson's stats to their average totals:

Inductees: 1081 GP, 464-601-1065

Anderson : 1129 GP, 498-601-1099

Anderson played a few more games than average, but his goals and points per game were a virtual saw-off. Now let's look at the playoffs:

Inductees: 126 GP, 50-63-113

Anderson : 225 GP, 93-121-214

Anderson is the fourth highest scorer in Stanley Cup history. Of the 10 inductees only Kurri and Savard have even half of his points. In the tighter checking of the playoffs the peer group's per-game production fell by about 10%, Anderson's by a bare 2%. More importantly he played way more games, which in the playoffs is a direct by-product of WINNING. He's got the 6 rings to prove it; even with the addition of Duff, the group of 10 have only 19 among them, including five players with none at all. For sure part of that is opportunity, but you could make the same case for Duff, Kurri, Gillies, and Mullen who all landed in the right place(s) at the right time and made the most of their opportunity.

The most statistically comparable inductee to Anderson is probably Joe Mullen, a player with virtually identical regular season stats to Anderson (502 goals to 498, 1063 points to 1099) but only half of Andy's playoff production (106 points to 214, three Cups to Anderson's six). Mullen was inducted in his first year of eligibility, while 10 years after his retirement Anderson remains on the outside looking in. It is not my point to say Joe Mullen doesn't belong in the Hall -- quite the contrary! -- but if he's there, Glenn Anderson should be there.

Ironically, perhaps the most stylistically-comparable recent inductee to Anderson is the one non-NHLer, Valeri Kharlamov. Both were lightning-in-a-bottle fast with an equal ability to finish a solo drive to the net or make the killer pass at full speed. Both game-breakers struck terror into their opposition with their innate ability to rise to the big occasion, and to find or create holes in the staunchest defences. In Anderson's case, that can be seen in his five playoff overtime goals, or that in an Oiler record book dominated by Gretzky it is Anderson who comfortably leads in game-winning goals.

Andy loved to represent Canada and for years was an automatic choice for the world's deepest team, winning two Canada Cups and appearing in the Olympics, two World Championships (on the rare occasions his playoffs ended early), and on the All-NHL team in Rendezvous '87.

As his peer group shows, making the Hall of Fame can be about the numbers, or it can be about winning. Glenn Anderson's case can be made on both fronts. His continued exclusion from the Hockey Hall of Fame casts a bad light not on the individual, but the institution.

Bruce

*****

Date: November 15, 2006

To: Bruce

From: Philip Pritchard, HHoF

Re: The compelling case for Glenn Anderson

Thanks for the note and your interest in the Hockey Hall of Fame.

I am going to forward this on to the Hockey Hall of Fame's Selection Committee. I trust they will look at it and appreciate all the talents Mr. Anderson brought to the game of hockey, as much as you do.

Thanks again for your interest.

Regards

Philip Pritchard

Hockey Hall of Fame