Winnipeg has been in the news a lot lately because of their deputy mayor's inquiry about bringing the Penguins to Winnipeg. There has been a lot of noise on message boards by Winnipeg residents about bringing the NHL back to Winnipeg for two reasons, a new CBA and the new MTS Centre. The belief is that a new CBA will lower tickets or something to enable Winnipeg to get a team and the rink will provide a place for said team to play in.

There are problems with both of those reasons though.

A new CBA isn't going to lower ticket prices. If the owners do somehow manage to get a $30M hard cap (which I doubt they will and pray that they don't) it doesn't mean that Winnipeg make sense as an NHL market. NHL markets are based upon where owners think they can make the most money. It suddenly makes a whole bunch of other markets viable as well. If an NHL owner thought he could make more money in Winnipeg, he'd move his team regardless of the CBA.

The other problem is the MCT Centre. I don't know why the people involved with building it decided to make it the size they did. The building is smaller, with fewer suites, then any of the NHL rinks that have been built in the past decade. If they wanted an NHL franchise why didn't they build an NHL calibre rink? But if they wanted an AHL (or maybe a WHL franchise instead) rink, why did they build it that size?

It reminds me of the Ottawa Civic Centre. I wasn't alive when the Civic Centre was developed but looking back it was a stupid idea. It too was built too small to be a long term NHL building but it was too big for junior hockey for a long time. By having a building big enough to host most non-hockey events, it made building a new, NHL calibre rink for Ottawa a bad idea. It took the vision of Bruce Firestone and the financial acumen of Rod Bryden to finally get the Ottawa area an NHL arena.

I think you'll continue to hear lots of noise about NHL teams moving to Winnipeg. The NHL like the idea of using Winnipeg as the boogeyman for fans of franchises looking for public funds. Just like Major League Baseball used the dome in Tampa Bay for years to pressure cities to build new ballparks, the NHL wants to use Winnipeg to scare markets into supporting their team. "Support your hockey team or it will move to Winnipeg!", will be the rallying call in New Jersey, Long Island and Pittsburgh. (0) comments

Allen Panzieri reported in today's Ottawa Citizen that John Muckler is interested in Oiler Georges Laraque. Not a big deal. Ottawa Sun sports columnist/fiction writer Bruce Garrioch had already reported the same rumour.

But Panzieri speculated that Laraque might be traded for Todd White because of their similiar salaries.

There's just a couple of problems with that speculation:

John Muckler has stated that he isn't looking to deal anyone off the Senators roster. He's looking to add players by trading prospects and/or draft picks.

John Muckler has been extremely straight forward during his tenure so far in Ottawa.

Laraque is a liability right now having signed a three year contract for $4.1M at the start of the season. You don't pay a fourth liner $1.4M, no matter how dominating he is at dropping the gloves, when the owners are pushing for a salary cap in the upcoming CBA. Who wants to waste $1.4M of cap room on a guy who'll play 8 minutes a night when it could force to trade someone who is good hockey player?

Todd White makes more of an impact on the Senators roster then Laraque would.

Kind of makes you wonder how Panzieri pulls a paycheck on a regular basis when he doesn't even have to make sense.

Who knows. Maybe Muckler will get Laraque. During Havlat's recent suspension Chris Neil filled in admirably for him on the third line with Spezza and Smolinski. If Laraque were acquired, maybe Jacques would move Havlat to left wing with Bonk and Hossa, put Neil back on the third line and have Laraque replace Neil as the fourth line right wing.

# posted by BlackRedGold : 11:00 PM

(0) comments

I'm convinced that Ian Mendes of Sportsnet is the best person covering the Senators today. He makes the Garriochs and Stevensons look like clueless buffoons when you compare their articles.

I don't exactly agree with his opinion on Martin Havlat. But I love this part of the article:

Granted, my job as a Sportsnet reporter on television is simply to convey the facts of a story and let the viewer make up his own opinion. If I slanted each TV story I did with my own personal bias, well then, I'd always be talking about how great the Canadiens are, because I grew up a Habs fan.

Shouldn't newspaper guys have the same obligation? Maybe Bruce Garrioch and Chris Stevenson should remember this the next time they make up a trade rumour about Radek Bonk or think Jacques Martin should be fired. (0) comments

So Pat Quinn is up in arms about Daniel Alfredsson poking fun at Sundin's actions against Nashville? I guess he's got to find a way to deflect attention from his team's pitiful performance. I don't care that they were missing a bunch of their best players. They were only missing one defenceman. They might have had problems scoring but why couldn't they keep from getting scored on?

I find it pretty hypocritical for Quinn to attack Alfredsson's reputation when he's got three of the least respected players in the game on his roster - Tucker, Domi and Marchment. (0) comments