Game preview: Edmonton at Toronto

The Toronto Rock and Edmonton Rush begin their 2011 seasons this Saturday night at the Air Canada Centre. The Rock are coming off a very successful, if streaky, season. They started off 6-1 and then lost five in a row before pulling it together again and winning three of their last four. Despite finishing with a mediocre 9-7 record, the Rock got hot in the playoffs and returned to the Championship game for the first time since winning it in 2005. They lost to a superior Washington Stealth team, but a number of Rock players had never been to the finals before and got a taste of what it's like to get there – and what it's like to lose. They will be hungry to get back there again and this time, take home the trophy.

The Rush had their most successful season by far in 2010. They finished above .500 for the first time and made the playoffs for the first time. In fact, it could be argued that they just didn't suck for the first time. The Rush missed making it to their first ever Championship game by one overtime goal. The long-suffering Rush fans were treated to an exciting season, and hopes are high in Edmonton that they can repeat their success in 2011.

The Rock and Rush met twice last year and split the series, with each team winning at home. In February, the Rock demolished the Rush 16-7 in Toronto, as Blaine Manning scored 5 goals and added 5 assists. A week later, Ryan Powell scored 4 and added 4 helpers as the Rush held off the Rock 14-13 in Edmonton.

When the Rock won the Championship in 2005, they were an offensive powerhouse, with Colin Doyle, Josh Sanderson, and Blaine Manning all finishing with over 100 points. Last year only Sanderson (then on Calgary, now on Boston) hit the century mark, but the Rock had four players over 80 points – the only other team to have more than two was the Minnesota Swarm who had three. (Yes, the Swarm. I checked it twice.) Two of those four were rookies so as long as the sophomore slump doesn't hit both Billings and LeBlanc, the Rock should still be right up there again in the goals scored department, especially after adding Pat Maddalena to the mix.

On the other side, the Rush tied for the most goals allowed last year so in the off-season, they were looking for ways to cut down on opposing attackers getting good shots on their goaltenders. Given the sheer size of the Rush defense, the Rock attackers may have trouble even seeing Matt Disher at all, let alone shooting at him. Only one player on the Rock roster (Tim O'Brien, who typically doesn't see much floor time) is listed at over 215 pounds, while the Rush have five, including three (one of which is Disher himself) at 260. And I'd like to see a Rock player try and pull the old swim move on 6-foot-10 David Morgan.

The big story of this game is Brodie vs. Patrick – the battle of the brothers Merrill. According to edmontonrush.com, the pair have only met in an NLL game once before, when the New York Titans (remember them?) featuring Patrick beat the Portland Lumberjax (remember them?) featuring Brodie back in 2008. Patrick is a tough defender and drops the gloves occasionally, while Brodie is the NLL's reigning Transition Player of the Year (two years running) and knows his way around both ends of the floor. Brodie is obviously one of the premier transition players in the game, but if anyone has ideas on how to shut him down, it might be his brother.

Given the fact that only one team scored more than the Rock last year, and nobody got scored on more than the Rush, you might think this will be a cakewalk for the Rock. It's hard to compare between divisions though – the Rush scored 11 fewer goals and allowed a whopping 45 more goals than the Rock last year, but ended up with a better W-L record.

Need a good blog post / Maybe some movie haikus? / I'll start with Star Wars

I hated English class in high school. And the part of English class that I hated the most was poetry. But I always liked doing haikus. Why? Because they didn't have to rhyme! The only real rule was the syllables, and I can count as well as anyone. Sure, you sometimes had to work a little to pack as much "information" into seventeen syllables as you could, but hey, I'm on twitter now – seventeen syllables, 140 characters, same idea.

I recently began posting Star Wars haikus to my facebook status as well as twitter. Both trilogies (in the order the movies were released) in a total of 102 syllables. They are summarized here. The Harry Potter saga is next.

Star Wars

Alderaan destroyed
Great disturbance in the Force
Death Star is no moon

The Empire Strikes Back

Yoda in a swamp
Trap is set on Cloud City
Vader is Luke's dad

Return of the Jedi

Yoda dies and fades
Vader has some good in him
Ewoks save the day

The Phantom Menace

Droid army invades
Ani and Obi-Wan meet
Jar Jar ruins it

Attack of the Clones

Grievous coughs a lot
Ani and Padme get hitched
But it's a secret

Revenge of the Sith

Dooku bites the dust
Anakin fights Obi-Wan
Darth Vader is born

2011 NLL Predictions from the NLL Blog

Just for fun, each of the writers at the NLL Blog have made predictions on the final standings of the 2011 NLL season. The rosters have been set and the season starts in just a couple of days, so here they are. Make sure to bookmark this article so you can check on how we did at the end of the season!

 

NLL East

 

Melissa Dafni	Alex Hinkley	Avry Lewis-Macdougall	Kevin Neibauer	Graeme Perrow	Mike Wilson
Toronto	Buffalo	Buffalo	Boston	Toronto	Toronto
Buffalo	Boston	Toronto	Buffalo	Boston	Boston
Philadelphia	Toronto	Boston	Rochester	Buffalo	Buffalo
Boston	Philadelphia	Philadelphia	Philadelphia	Rochester	Rochester
Rochester	Rochester	Rochester	Toronto	Philadelphia	Philadelphia

 

NLL West

 

Melissa Dafni	Alex Hinkley	Avry Lewis-Macdougall	Kevin Neibauer	Graeme Perrow	Mike Wilson
Colorado	Calgary	Washington	Washington	Washington	Washington
Washington	Colorado	Edmonton	Edmonton	Colorado	Edmonton
Edmonton	Washington	Minnesota	Calgary	Edmonton	Colorado
Minnesota	Minnesota	Colorado	Minnesota	Calgary	Calgary
Calgary	Edmonton	Calgary	Colorado	Minnesota	Minnesota

 

Consensus says another Toronto-Washington final. The Stealth had four first place votes out of six, and only one person had them finishing as low as third. Not much love for Philly or Rochester in the East or Minnesota in the West. Calgary, Colorado, and Toronto got both first and last place votes. We've got an interesting season ahead!

What led you to me?

Here are some actual searches that led people to my blog from September to December 2010. 

Attention Facebook readers: You might want to click the "View Original Post" link at the bottom of this note. Facebook sometimes messes up the formatting.

• "toop ten 2010 fucking girls an sking" – I have no idea how this led to my blog. I even tried doing the same search and my blog didn't show up in the results. I messed around with this search string to try and make my blog appear in the results – including adding "cut the chatter" to it – but I couldn't.
• "garth brooks bmw truck opera subsidize"
• These three were all on the same day. Not sure if it was the same guy who kept forgetting the answer or three different people, but I have not seen criteria like this on any other day.
  • "my middle name is earl song lyrics"
  • "my middle name is earl lyrics to song"
  • "what song miidle name is earl"
• Someone found my blog through a search from www.google.com.ar. This must be Google's search engine for pirates.
• "my face has sunken"
• "i have been sent home with a t-tube coming out of my tummy what is this"
• "boys on pool table doing the macarena" as well as "macarena boys dancing pool table"
• "procedure for placing drain tube in buttock cheek ct guided"
• "should you call ambulance when acute pancreatitis attack" – on the assumption that you don't want to die, I'd say yes
• "do they have to cut my stomach to tie my tubes"
• "is wayne gretzky circumcised" – I wrote an article on circumcision several years ago and ever since, I've seen a number of searches hit my blog asking about the... um... status of celebrities including Wayne Gretzky, Eric Lindros, Charlie Sheen, Clay Buchholz, and others. I don't know why this information would be of value to anyone and honestly, I don't want to know why someone thinks it might be.

2011 NLL Overview and Predictions

Attention Facebook readers: You might want to click the "View Original Post" link at the bottom of this note. Facebook sometimes messes up the formatting.

NLL East

Boston Blazers

In: David Brock, Kevin Buchanan, Scott Campbell, Geoff McNulty, John Orsen, Casey Powell, Matt Quinton, Kyle Rubisch, Josh Sanderson

Out: Gary Bining, Paul Dawson, Mat Giles, Jon Harnett, Matt Lyons, Sean Morris, Kyle Ross, Matt Smalley, Brendon Thenhaus, Daryl Veltman, Head Coach Tom Ryan

Comments: There's only one ball. Sanderson can score, to be sure, but he loves to pass. But both Dawson and Powell are used to being the guy. Can they both be the guy at the same time? Head coach Tom Ryan was fired during training camp, which tells me that he was not fired because they bowed out in the first round of the playoffs in each of the last two years, or because ownership felt that they underachieved with an 8-8 record last year. In either of those cases, he would have been fired long before now. No, that tells me that either Sanderson or Powell (or both) didn't like Ryan or something about his coaching style, and they demanded that he be fired. This does not scream "cohesive unit" to me and makes me wonder if this will be like Canada's 2002 Heritage Cup team – a group of superstars that could not play as a team.

Prediction: Second

 

Buffalo Bandits

In: Chad Culp, Clay Hill, Travis Irving, Tracy Kelusky, Scott Self, Brendon Thenhaus, Jay Thorimbert

Out: Mike Accursi, Kevin Dostie, Sean Greenhalgh, Ken Montour, Kyle Schmelzle, Billy Dee Smith, Brandon Swamp

Comments: No major changes for the Bandits; the biggest would be losing Accursi and picking up Kelusky. Both are veterans with leadership ability, but Kelusky scored 20 more points last year in 2 less games. Greenhalgh and Smith (at least) are injured to start the season, but may return. Adding Culp and Thenhaus will help the offense, and Self is a solid defender.

Prediction: Third

 

Philadelphia Wings

In: Matt Alrich, Ryan Boyle, Paul Dawson, Ray Hodgkinson, Steve Holmes, Athan Iannucci, Bodie MacDonald, Brett Manney, Ryan McClelland, Ryan McFadyen, David Mitchell, Brendan Mundorf, Shawn Nadelen, Joe Smith, Alex Turner

Out: Rob Blasdell, Jason Crosbie, Dave Cutten, Tom Hajek, Kevin Huntley, Jordan Levine, Brett Moyer, Steve Panarelli, Jeff Reynolds, Josh Sims, Bob Snider, Geoff Snider, Dan Teat, Kyle Wailes, Mike Ward

Comments: Wow, is there anyone on the team from last year? Six of their top ten scorers last year (Wailes, Snider, Teat, Giles, Huntley, Crosbie) are gone, and their backup goalies are both rookies. On the upside, Athan Iannucci is returning, and if he's anywhere close to as dominant as he was in 2008, he'll be a serious offensive force to be reckoned with. Then again, that was three years ago.

Prediction: Fifth

 

Rochester Knighthawks

In: Mike Accursi, Troy Bonterre, Tyler Burton, Jarrett David, Colin Hall, Cody Jamieson, Pat McCready, Ian Rubel, Josh Ruys, Matt Vinc, Chase Williams, Matt Zash

Out: Marshall Abrams, Mac Allen, Cory Bomberry, Matt Danowski, Shawn Evans, Kevin Fines, John Grant Jr., Jordan Hall, Peter Jacobs, Cody Johnson, Bobby McBride, Pat O'Toole, Andrew Potter, Regy Thorpe, Steve Toll, Shawn Williams

Comments: Abrams, Shawn Evans, Hall, and Shawn Williams are all starting the season on the injured list, with no announcements on how long they might be out. I know that Williams broke his arm during an MSL game during the summer, but was supposed to be healed and ready for training camp, so hopefully Knighthawks fans won't have to wait long for his return. Mike Accursi adds some offensive punch, and Cody Jamieson is heavily hyped. Rochester must believe wholeheartedly that he will be the real deal, since they signed him to an unprecedented 10-year deal in mid-December. With all due respect to Pat O'Toole, who did a better-than-admirable job in net last year, their goaltending has improved with the trade for Matt Vinc, but the big question is: can the Knighthawks replace the offense of John Grant, Jr.?

Update: The Shawns, Williams and Evans, have both been activated from the injured list, and Chase Williams and Colin Hall have been released.

Prediction: Fourth

 

Toronto Rock

In: Pat Campbell, Mike MacLeod, Pat Maddalena, Patrick Merrill, Gee Nash, Tim O'Brien, Aaron Pascas, Kyle Ross

Out: Scott Campbell, Steve Dietrich, Brendan Doran, Mike Hominuck, Anthony Lackey, Pat McCready, Geoff McNulty, Kim Squire, Josh Wasson

Comments: No huge losses for the Rock, but they've added Pat Maddalena for some more offense, and upgraded their goaltending by replacing the now-retired Steve Dietrich with Paddy Campbell and Gee Nash. I don't know about other Rock fans, but I will sleep a little easier knowing who's backing up the Whipper. I also applaud the signing of Tim O'Brien. I'm not a big fan of fighting in lacrosse, but I recognize that it's sometimes necessary and if someone has to spend five minutes in the box, I'd rather it be O'Brien than Doyle, Billings, or LeBlanc. Also with O'Brien's reputation as a fierce fighter, people just might take a few less liberties with the big scorers, so even if he doesn't actually do anything, his mere presence may help. Toronto made it to the finals last year, and I'm trying not to be a homer about my prediction here, but I don't see any reason why they couldn't get back there again.

Prediction: First

 

NLL West

Calgary Roughnecks

In: Cory Conway, Curtis Dickson, Jon Harnett, Derek Hopcroft, Brandon Ivey, Dan MacRae, Dayne Michaud, Curtis Palidwor, Geoff Snider, Daryl Veltman, Kurtis Wagar

Out: Craig Conn, Craig Gelsvik, Tracey Kelusky, Matt King, Rob Kirkby, John Lintz, Cutris Manning, Jeff Moleski, Josh Sanderson, Carlton Schuss, Rob Van Beek, Devan Wray

Comments: Snider will pick up every face-off and loose ball available, and then pass to... who? The Roughnecks have lost two of their most potent scoring threats in Sanderson and Kelusky. They still have Dane Dobbie and it's not like they got nothing in return – Daryl Veltman picked up 65 points for the Blazers last year. A healthy Kaleb Toth will also help, but it's not just about numbers. Replacing Sanderson's vision on the floor will be difficult. The Roughnecks also replaced their starting goalie with former backup Mike Poulin and also signed Curtis Palidwor, who announced his retirement a week before the rosters were announced.

Prediction: Fourth

 

Colorado Mammoth

In: Mac Allen, Shayne Bennett, Rob Blasdell, Ned Crotty, Ben Davies, John Grant Jr., Matt King, Matt Leveque, Mike Mclellan, Jarrett Park, Steve Toll, Josh Wasson

Out: Rich Catton, Cory Conway, Chad Culp, Shawn Dhaliwal, Chris Gill, Chris Levis, Andrew Leyshon, Derek Malawsky, Ryan McFadyen, David Morgan, Bruce Murray, Curtis Palidwor, Jed Prossner, Brad Richardson, Bryan Safarik, Neil Tyacke, Matt Wilson

Comments: Out goes a superstar goalie, and in comes one of the most prolific scorers in league history. Grant isn't well liked in Denver after delivering a punishing hit to John Gallant about five years ago. Some call him the "Todd Bertuzzi of lacrosse", though Bertuzzi was never one of the best players in the league, as Grant has arguably been for most of his career, nor was Grant's hit nearly as brutal as Bertuzzi's. Hell, Gallant himself has forgiven Grant, so surely the Mammoth fans can as well. And if he plays at the same level as he has in Rochester for a decade, I think they will. And considering Matt Vinc never played a game in a Mammoth uniform anyway, they pretty much got Grant for free.

The Mammoth also released Andrew Leyshon and Curtis Palidwor and picked up Matt King from Calgary so although their goaltending isn't as good as it would have been with Vinc, it's still better than last season. They've also re-signed all of the Gajic brothers (I think they have twelve of them now), so I predict pretty good things for the Mammoth this year.

Update: Chris Levis is on the roster, and will be the backup goalie along with Blazer. The Mammoth also signed transition specialist speedin' Stevie Toll after Rochester released him. I would have been happy to take Toll back on the Rock at any point in the last few years, but if Rochester released him, perhaps he's lost a step or two. But even if he's not as fast as he once was, he's still a better-than-average defender.

Prediction: Second

 

Edmonton Rush

In: Bill Greer, Kedoh Hill, John Lafontaine, Bruce Murray, Devan Wray, Bobby McBride

Out: Bruce Alexander, Chris McElroy, Ryan McNish, Justin Norbraten, Ryan Powell

Comments: For five years, the Rush were the L.A. Clippers or Toronto Maple Leafs of the NLL. No matter how bad your team was, you could always count on the Rush to be worse. But sometimes being last has its privileges - in 2010, the Rush selected first in the Portland dispersal draft and picked up Brodie Merrill, who they hoped had the power to turn the team around. They also changed coaches and picked up Matt Disher, Ryan Ward, and Derek Malawsky. Merrill lived up to his billing as a franchise player, and the Rush not only made the playoffs for the first time in franchise history, they finished tied for second in the west and were one overtime goal away from the Championship game. The Rush haven't made many changes to their lineup for 2011. Former Roughneck Devan Wray comes home to Edmonton as a faceoff specialist, and former captain Chris McElroy has moved on to Washington.

Update: Devan Wray is actually on the practice roster.

Prediction: Third

 

Minnesota Swarm

In: Mat Giles, Tyler Hass, Travis Hill, Matt Kelly, Ryan Sharp, Rory Smith, Andrew Suitor

Out: Colin Achenbach, Kevin Buchanan, Ryan Cousins, Josh Funk, Scott Self, Sean Thomson, Jay Thonimbert

Comments: The Swarm made the playoffs despite a 5-11 (.313) record, which is the second worst ever in the NLL (three teams made the playoffs in 1993 and 1994 with 2-6 (.250) records) and third worst ever in any sport (the 1952-53 Baltimore Bullets of the NBA made the playoffs with a 16-54 (.229) record). They were beaten by the eventual champion Stealth, but I'm curious about the lack of significant changes in their lineup during the off-season. A 5-11 record, playoffs or not, should be an indication that major changes are needed, but they haven't really made any. Perhaps they have followed the Toronto Maple Leafs modus operandi and decided that as long as they made the playoffs, the season can be considered a success. God help them if they head down that path.

Prediction: Fifth

 

Washington Stealth

In: Chet Koneczny, Chris McElroy, Jeff Moleski

Out: Joel Dalgarno, Wade DeWolff, Travis Gillespie, Ben Hunt, Brett Manney, Kyle Sorensen

Comments: They won the Championship last year, and have made minimal changes to their roster this year. The only significant changes are the additions of Moleski and McElroy, who will bolster an already better-than-average defense. Their offense was pretty damned impressive already, and in the list of best one-two goalie tandems in the league, Richards and Roik are right up there. Not much to say here – no reason to believe they won't kick serious ass again this year.

Prediction: First

 

Overall Standings

East

1. Toronto
2. Boston
3. Buffalo
4. Rochester
5. Philadelphia

West

1. Washington
2. Colorado
3. Edmonton
4. Calgary
5. Minnesota

Beauty and the Beast

We went to see the Ross Petty production of Beauty and the Beast last weekend. (Thanks Kerri for getting on the phone as soon as tickets were available and getting us third row seats!) Ross Petty has produced (and starred in) a pantomime at the Elgin Theatre in Toronto every Christmas for 15 years, and this is our third (or fourth?) year going to see them. It's always a lot of fun, and this year was no different. Petty always gets some fairly big name people in the show: In past years, he's gotten Kurt Browning, Alan Frew, Patty Sullivan (if you have young kids and live in Canada you will likely recognize her), Don Harron, Jessica Holmes, and even Bret "The Hitman" Hart. This year it was former Canadian Idol winner Melissa O'Neill and Kids In The Hall alumnus Scott Thompson. Petty himself always stars as the villain, and loves to be booed - so much so that if he appears on the stage and doesn't get booed, he stops, looks at the audience, and waits until they start booing him, grinning all the while. Then he inevitably tells everyone to shut up, though of course he wants nothing of the sort. He likes to get some topical humour in there as well; last year he talked about Tiger Woods, and this year he called the audience a bunch of left-wing pinkos.

The shows are aimed at kids (and there are a zillion of 'em there), but there are enough "grown-up" jokes that we parents always get a good laugh as well. The best one this year was by Scott Thompson, who was dressed in drag as Aunt Plinky. (There's always someone in drag in these shows.) At one point, they bring three kids from the audience (Nicky was chosen last year!) up on stage and talk to them a little. Scott was dressed as Queen Elizabeth at this point, and asked one of the kids "Have you ever been this close to a queen before?", and gave a knowing look to the audience. This was funny enough for most of the kids but for the adults, knowing that Thompson is gay made it even funnier. After the little girl said no, Thompson replied "Well, you probably have but you didn't know it."

I love all the little unexpected things they throw in there – things that aren't necessary, don't advance the plot or anything like that, they're just funny. Near the end of the play, when the problem has been solved and the bad guy defeated, the main characters come together and sing the "We Did It!" song from Dora the Explorer. Or when the main two characters (Bella and Prince Zack) are singing a romantic love song to each other, Aunt Plinky shows up with his her bubble gun and dances around silently blowing bubbles all over the stage. Every year, Petty picks a particularly silly dance sequence and says afterward "You won't see that at the Nutcracker!", which is not only funny because it's absolutely true, but also because he is married to Canada's most famous ballerina, Karen Kain.

Petty has a clever way of mentioning the sponsors – they take two "commercial breaks" and show very funny commercials featuring the actors and/or characters from the play. This year we had "Queen Elizabeth" (Thompson again) staying at the Royal York, Bella trying on dresses and Aunt Plinky getting drunk and passing out at The Bay, and "Busking Beaver" (Justin Bieber with buck teeth and a flat tail) buying wood at Lowe's, among others.

If you get a chance to see one of Ross Petty's plays near Christmas some year, definitely check it out, especially if you have kids. Just don't get tickets too early, or you may get the ones that we should be getting. And if you're going the same night as us, definitely do not go to Baton Rouge across the street for dinner beforehand. I'm sure the Popeye's Chicken across the street is just as good.

At least they made the playoffs

Nicky's soccer team played in the consolation final yesterday, since they lost their semi-final game last week. The game was tied so they went to penalty shots and ended up losing. (Note that there are only four teams in this league, so fourth place is the same as last.) Nicky's teammate's mother and little sister (I think she's six) were sitting next to me, and this conversation occurred after the game:

Little Girl: Did we win the first place cup?
Mom: No, honey, we didn't.
Little Girl: Did we win second place?
Mom: No.
Little Girl: Third place?
Mom: No, not third either.
Little Girl: Fourth place?
Mom: Yes.
Little Girl: Oh. That's the Stinker Cup.

Stability in the NLL

Note: this is a "recycled" article from my blog from a few years ago. I've updated and posted it to the NLL blog.

Most NLL fans know that every year, teams appear, disappear, or move. But here's a sobering fact: the last time an NLL season began with exactly the same teams as the previous year (in the same cities) was 1993. That's eighteen straight seasons with some kind of team movement. Here's what's happened since then:

• 1994: Removed Pittsburgh
• 1995: Added Rochester, removed Detroit
• 1996: Added Charlotte
• 1997: Removed Charlotte
• 1998: Added Ontario and Syracuse, removed Boston
• 1999: Ontario moved to Toronto
• 2000: Added Albany, Baltimore moved to Pittsburgh
• 2001: Pittsburgh moved to Washington, Syracuse moved to Ottawa, added Columbus
• 2002: Added New Jersey, Montreal, Calgary, Vancouver
• 2003: Washington moved to Colorado, removed Montreal
• 2004: New Jersey moved to Anaheim, Albany moved to San Jose, Columbus moved to Arizona, removed New York and Ottawa
• 2005: Added Minnesota, removed Vancouver
• 2006: Added Edmonton and Portland, removed Anaheim
• 2007: Added New York and Chicago
• 2008: Removed Arizona
• 2009: Added Boston, removed Chicago
• 2010: New York moved to Orlando, San Jose moved to Washington, removed Portland
• 2011: Removed Orlando

Sometimes franchises fail because lacrosse just didn't sell in that city (Ottawa, Anaheim, Orlando, San Jose). Occasionally they fail because of corrupt or incompetent ownership (Vancouver). In the case of Arizona in 2008, it was some mystery reason that made no sense. This was the year that the NLL season was temporarily cancelled due to a labour dispute. The Sting shut down operations because of the cancellation, but then the season was resurrected two weeks later. Arizona management announced that they had already shut everything down and couldn't restart it in time (though every other team managed it), so they'd just sit out 2008 and return in 2009. Of course they didn't return at all, so it sounded to me like they used the season cancellation as an excuse to fold up operations since they weren't making much money. This is too bad for Arizona fans, since they had a very good team that made the finals twice in three years. The Chicago thing was another mystery reason — their owners said that it was just too difficult to manage the team in Chicago from their offices in Atlanta and LA. Mmmmmmkay. Never heard of phones? Email? Video conferencing? Hell, hire someone who lives in Chicago that can run things.

Whatever happened to due diligence, not only on the part of NLL ownership groups, but on the part of the NLL itself?

Apparently the Chicago owner announced that he wanted to sell the team during the middle of the 2008 season, which means that less than two seasons after he bought an expansion franchise, he was trying to sell it. Did he not consider the "difficulty" of running a team from a thousand miles away before spending $3 million to buy an expansion franchise? Did the NLL not ask him how he intended to run the team from a thousand miles away?

Twenty-six NLL teams have folded or moved since the league was formed in 1987. Of those, four (Ontario, Charlotte, Montreal, Orlando) only lasted a single season. Compare that to the NHL, where a total of eighteen teams have folded or moved since 1917. Four cities (Pittsburgh, Washington, New York, and New Jersey) have had NLL teams fail twice. Does this sound like a good league to purchase a franchise in?

Having said that, the Toronto, Colorado, Calgary, Philadelphia, Buffalo, and Rochester franchises are all healthy. I don't know about Edmonton or Minnesota, but I haven't heard any negative rumours about those. Boston and Washington are probably too new to really have a good grasp, but 2011 will be Boston's third season in the league, so that bodes well for them. I really hope that the late 90's and early 2000's were a kind of experimental phase for the NLL, where they tried lots of new markets, many of which failed. Now that they have a core of seven or eight franchises that are doing well and are unlikely to fold, perhaps we'll see a little more stability.

Slacktivism

A week or two ago, a meme went around facebook where people would change their picture to that of a cartoon character and set their status to something urging others to do the same. This was supposed to be some sort of campaign against child abuse. But not once in any of the statuses that I saw was there any explanation of exactly how changing your facebook picture would have the slightest impact on this problem. Is some scumbag out there going to see all these pictures of cartoon characters on facebook and decide not to beat their child that evening because of it? Call me pessimistic, but I don't think so. Some may say that it was to "raise awareness". Who doesn't already know about child abuse? Other than the abusers themselves, who doesn't already think it's a terrible thing? Whose awareness are you trying to raise?

I'm not trying to be negative here and say that this is a problem that we can't solve so let's just do nothing. I'm not saying that people who do this are idiots. And there's certainly no harm in changing your facebook picture. But anyone who believes that this type of "campaign" will have any effect on anything is delusional. This is just another form of slacktivism, where people think they can cause real change in the world without actually doing any work.

This has come up on both facebook and twitter many times over the last few years: Copy this line to your facebook status if you know anyone who's died from cancer. Black out your twitter picture to protest a proposed copyright law in New Zealand. Join this group to protest <cause of the day>. Sign this internet petition to protest high taxes. Could the government look at an internet petition with several thousand "signatures" on it and rethink their budget because of it? Not bloody likely, but I guess it's theoretically possible. But how is changing your facebook status to "I know someone who died of cancer" going to change anything? And quite frankly, who doesn't know someone who's died of cancer?

Every couple of years there's the "gas-out" where everyone is supposed to not buy gas on a particular day (sometimes from a particular gas company) to protest high gas prices. This is not quite the same thing, in that people are doing something real, but nobody considers the fact that if Wednesday is the gas-out day and you were going to buy gas that day, then you'd have to buy it on Tuesday or Thursday instead. Even if they sold no gas on the gas-out day, the total demand over the course of the week would be the same as usual, and so there might be some momentary blip in gas prices but nothing long-term. This is proven by the past few gas-outs, where gas prices drop by a few cents on the day of, only to rise back to normal a day or two later.

Another form of slacktivism is the "ribbon" magnets people put on their cars. Many of them are for some medical condition or another (again, "let's raise awareness for cancer" – who doesn't know about cancer?), but some simply say "support the troops". These ones confuse me too. Originally I assumed they meant that the person was in favour of the fighting in Iraq, Iran, Afghanistan, etc., i.e. they support the war and agree with those who decided to send the soldiers overseas. But later I heard that even if you don't support the reason the American and Canadian troops are fighting, you should display these magnets to say you support the soldiers themselves. This makes no sense. Saying that you support the war is a political statement that many agree with and many do not, and some may feel strongly enough about their position that they want to broadcast it to the world. But agree or disagree with the war itself, who doesn't support the soldiers? What's the alternative – hope they die? Why do you need to put something on your car that says "I hope the soldiers overseas are not killed!"

Now as I talk about ribbon magnets, I should say for the record that I do have a magnet on my car. It's shaped like a banner and it says "Transplants save lives". I've written before about a little girl we know who had four organs transplanted in 1997 at the age of six months. This surgery saved her life, and she will be 14 years old in a couple of months. This magnet could be considered slacktivism as well, but I argue that it's not. In order to do something real to help cure cancer, you'd have to be a doctor or scientist or both. You can certainly give money to the Cancer Society (or the CNIB or the Diabetes Association or whatever); I do it myself and I will never argue that it's a bad thing. But all you need to do to support organ donation is sign your organ donor card, which takes almost no effort and costs nothing. I've done it, my wife has done it, many of my friends have done it, and if something terrible should happen to one of us and the organs are needed, just signing the card has saved someone's life. Not to take anything away from donating money, but donating organs can have a much more direct impact. If the magnet on my car reminds someone to sign their organ donor card, it will have served its purpose.

If you want to effect real change, get off your ass and get out there and do something real, or at least donate money to someone else who's doing something real. There are lots of charity walks, runs, and bike races, not to mention car washes, barbecues, and even 50-50 draws and raffles. Hell, I grew a moustache in Movember, which took almost no effort on my part, but it raised a coupla hundred bucks for prostate cancer research. That's about as close as you can get to doing something good with no work and no cost. Though come to think of it, I did change my facebook picture as part of it.

Five things you didn't know about Qatar

FIFA has chosen the tiny desert country of Qatar to host the 2022 World Cup of soccer. Qatar beat out the United States, South Korea, Japan, and Australia for this honour. Here are some facts about this surprising choice, thanks to Wikipedia.

1. The Qatari soccer team is ranked 113th in the world. They have never even qualified for the World Cup before. Neither has Canada, and we're ranked 28 spots higher than Qatar. Correction: Canada did qualify for the World Cup in 1986. They finished 0-3 and didn't score a single goal. Thanks Ryan!
2. The average high in July is 115°F or 46°C. That's really freakin' hot. But it's a desert, so it's a dry heat, right? Wrong! Qatar is bordered on three sides by the Persian Gulf, so it's really freakin' hot and humid. Perfect weather for playing soccer! Maybe the Qatari team does stand a good chance in 2022 because all the players from the other countries will be dropping like flies from heat exhaustion and dehydration.
3. There are only three stadia in Qatar that are even close to big enough to host this event. They plan on adding 18,000-23,000 seats to each one, and building another nine stadia, each of which will hold at least 43,000 people. They've managed to get by with three stadia up to now, so what the hell are they going to do with twelve of them after 2022?
4. The entire population of Qatar is about 1.7 million. Attendance at the 2010 World Cup in South Africa was double that. There are four cities and thirty five metropolitan areas in the United States (1 and 4 respectively in Canada) bigger than that. South Africa has a population of just under 50 million.

If you're still not sure why FIFA chose Qatar, point number 5 should clear it up:

5. 70% of all government revenues come from oil and gas. Qatar has 14% of the world's total reserves of natural gas. This is a very small and sparsely populated but extremely rich country.

Update: According to this article, after the World Cup, Qatar plans to dismantle the new stadia they are building and give them to poorer countries. I applaud this gesture.

All Things Being Equal

When fans discuss a league for a period of time, something that inevitably comes up is parity. This seems to be the goal of any league – the idea that all of the teams in the league are similar enough talent-wise that it's highly possible for any team to beat any other team on any given night. This also implies that any team has a reasonable shot at winning a championship. The idea certainly has merit. If you're a fan, you know that the chances of your team winning it all or at least being competitive are pretty good.

But if you listen to Bob McCown, one of Canada's most knowledgeable sports broadcasters (both loved and despised by many), he'll tell you point blank that parity is the worst thing that could possibly happen to a league. When you look back over the history of pro sports in North America, what kinds of team-related things do you remember? The Yankees' dominance in the 50's, the Islanders in the early 80's and the Oilers immediately after that, the Red Wings in the late 90's, and the Rock of the late 90's/early 2000's. Do you look back fondly on the years of parity? Do you even know when they occurred? No, you don't. You remember the dynasties.

With the dynasties come the, well, anti-dynasties, I suppose. We also remember the teams that were really bad for long periods of time – the Senators of the mid-90s, the lowly Nordiques before Eric Lindros turned them into the powerhouse Avalanche, the Maple Leafs for most of the last 40 years, and the Clippers, Pirates, and Cubs seemingly forever. Again, do you remember the years when all the teams were pretty good, but nobody was awesome and nobody was terrible?

So parity isn't so good for the history books, but is it good for the fans? That depends. I've been a Maple Leafs fan all my life, and apart from a few good years in the 80's and a few more in the 90's, they've been mediocre at best for the majority of that time, and downright awful for quite a bit of it. A little parity sounds like a pretty damned good idea there. The Jays were terrible from 1977 until about 1984, then good for the rest of the 80's, awesome in the early 90's, then dropped off and have been no better than pretty good for the last fifteen years. The Raptors were terrible for a while, then pretty good for a few years, and now they're terrible again. The aforementioned Cup-winning Islanders and Oilers are both pretty bad these days. It's a terrible feeling watching your favourite team lose, and know that they're going to have a lousy season and are not likely to improve for at least a couple of years. That feeling is made even worse knowing that some other teams are likely to be awesome for that entire period. I'm sure parity would be welcome to fans of those teams as well.

But I've also lived the other side of the equation, thanks to the NLL. I became a Rock fan in 2001, when they had already won two championships. The total number of home games they lost was in single digits for several years. In their first seven seasons, they won five championships and lost a total of two playoff games. The Wings stole the 2001 championship away (don't get me wrong, they earned that victory), but the Rock stormed back and won the next three of the next four. I can tell you that parity in the NLL was the last thing that Rock fans wanted around 2005.

So for the fans the conclusion is hardly surprising – when your team is winning, parity is something you want to avoid. When your team is losing, parity is something to strive for. How about for the league as a whole?

Obviously most leagues think that parity is ideal. They want fans from all of their teams to continue to pay money to come out to the games as much as possible. This is easier when all the games are meaningful because each team still has a chance to make the playoffs and win it all. This is at least part of the reason we have salary caps and luxury taxes and such, so that some teams can't outspend the rest of the teams by 200% and buy themselves a stacked team. Of course that wouldn't happen in a league without a salary cap, would it? Well, the pre-cap Toronto Maple Leafs and New York Rangers tried it for a number of years, but just ended up with some very expensive losing teams. But this strategy has worked very well for the New York Yankees, and has made the Yankees one of the most hated teams in all of North American sports, outside of New York anyway. It has also turned the Yankees into one of the biggest draws at MLB stadiums all over North America, and has made them one of the most valuable sports franchises in the world. And at the same time, MLB is doing very well financially, thank you very much, with no salary cap. Parity shmarity. How's that salary cap working for your owners, Mr. Bettman?

The NLL east has been pretty even for a couple of years. Only 2 games separated 2nd from 5th last year. In 2009, the top 3 teams had the same record 10-6 record, and in 2008, the top four were 10-6. The west has been kind of weird for a few years. Minnesota's 5-11 regular season record (.313) in 2010 is the second worst ever to make the playoffs in the NLL, and the third worst ever in any sport*. Calgary ran away with the west in 2009, and in 2008 San Jose and Colorado tied for the division lead with records just above .500.

In 2011, you've got a couple of strong teams (Washington and Boston) but nobody that's unbeatable. You've got some weak teams (Philly, Colorado, Minnesota), but nobody who's really terrible. And everybody else could easily find themselves in the playoffs or fighting for a spot. Could Washington repeat? Sure they could. It's way too early to say "dynasty", but they could easily be in the running again this year. But could I predict a Rush championship without looking like an idiot? Sure I could. Or the Blazers. Or the Rock. Or the Bandits. Could the Roughnecks win without Sanderson or Kelusky? Well, the Oilers won without Gretzky, so anything's possible.

* In the 1993 and 1994 NLL (called the MILL at the time) seasons, three different teams made the playoffs with 2-6 (.250) records. In the other major sports, only the 1952-53 Baltimore Bullets of the NBA were worse: 16-54 (.229). No NFL team has ever made the playoffs with a record under .500. In baseball, the 1981 KC Royals made the playoffs at 50-53 (.485), though that was a strike-shortened season. And my beloved Leafs made the playoffs in 1987-88 with a 21-49-10 record, which is .263 in wins (21 wins in 80 games) but ties screw things up. They got 52 out of a maximum of 160 points, which is .325.

Meme: Books I have read

Have you read more than 6 of these books? The BBC believes most people will have read only 6 of the 100 books here. How do your reading habits stack up?

Instructions: Copy this entire document. Look at the list and put an 'Yes' after those you have read [I bolded them too]. (Watching the movie DOES NOT COUNT)

Pride and Prejudice - Jane Austen - Yes
The Lord of the Rings - JRR Tolkien - Yes
Jane Eyre - Charlotte Bronte - No
Harry Potter series - JK Rowling - Yes
To Kill a Mockingbird - Harper Lee - Yes
The Bible - No
Wuthering Heights - Emily Bronte - No
1984 - George Orwell - No
His Dark Materials - Philip Pullman - No (only the first one "The Golden Compass")
Great Expectations - Charles Dickens - No
Little Women - Louisa M Alcott - No
Tess of the D'Urbervilles - Thomas Hardy - No
Catch 22 - Joseph Heller - No
Complete Works of Shakespeare - No, just a few in high school
Rebecca - Daphne Du Maurier - No
The Hobbit - JRR Tolkien - Yes
Birdsong - Sebastian Faulk - No
Catcher in the Rye - JD Salinger - Yes
The Time Traveler's Wife - Audrey Niffenegger - No
Middlemarch - George Eliot - No
Gone With The Wind - Margaret Mitchell - No
The Great Gatsby - F Scott Fitzgerald - Yes
Bleak House - Charles Dickens - No
War and Peace - Leo Tolstoy - No
The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy - Douglas Adams - Yes
Brideshead Revisited - Evelyn Waugh - No
Crime and Punishment - Fyodor Dostoyevsky - No
Grapes of Wrath - John Steinbeck - No
Alice in Wonderland - Lewis Carroll - No
The Wind in the Willows - Kenneth Grahame - Yes
Anna Karenina - Leo Tolstoy - No
David Copperfield - Charles Dickens - No
Chronicles of Narnia - CS Lewis - No (3 of the 7)
Emma - Jane Austen - No
Persuasion - Jane Austen - No
The Lion, The Witch and The Wardrobe - CS Lewis - Yes (Um... part of the Chronicles or Narnia above)
The Kite Runner - Khaled Hossein - No
Captain Corelli's Mandolin - Louis De Bernieres - No
Memoirs of a Geisha - Arthur Golden - No
Winnie the Pooh - AA Milne - No
Animal Farm - George Orwell - Yes
The Da Vinci Code - Dan Brown - Yes
One Hundred Years of Solitude - Gabriel Garcia Marquez - No
A Prayer for Owen Meaney - John Irving - No
The Woman in White - Wilkie Collins - No
Anne of Green Gables - LM Montgomery - No
Far From The Madding Crowd -Thomas Hardy - No
The Handmaid's Tale - Margaret Atwood - No
Lord of the Flies - William Golding - No
Atonement - Ian McEwan - No
Life of Pi - Yann Martel - Yes
Dune - Frank Herbert - No
Cold Comfort Farm - Stella Gibbons - No
Sense and Sensibility - Jane Austen - No
A Suitable Boy - Vikram Seth - No
The Shadow of the Wind - Carlos Ruiz Zafon - No
A Tale Of Two Cities - Charles Dickens - No
Brave New World - Aldous Huxley - No
The Curious Incident of the Dog in the Night - Mark Haddon - No
Love In The Time Of Cholera - Gabriel Garcia Marquez - No
Of Mice and Men - John Steinbeck - No
Lolita - Vladimir Nabokov - No
The Secret History - Donna Tartt - No
The Lovely Bones - Alice Sebold - No
Count of Monte Cristo - Alexandre Dumas - No
On The Road - Jack Kerouac - No
Jude the Obscure - Thomas Hardy - No
Bridget Jones's Diary - Helen Fielding - No
Midnight's Children - Salman Rushdie - No
Moby Dick - Herman Melville - No
Oliver Twist - Charles Dickens - No
Dracula - Bram Stoker - Yes
The Secret Garden - Frances Hodgson Burnett - No
Notes From A Small Island - Bill Bryson - No
Ulysses - James Joyce - No
The Inferno - Dante - No
Swallows and Amazons - Arthur Ransome - No
Germinal - Emile Zola - No
Vanity Fair - William Makepeace Thackeray - No
Possession - AS Byatt - No
A Christmas Carol - Charles Dickens - No
Cloud Atlas - David Mitchell - No
The Color Purple - Alice Walker - No
The Remains of the Day - Kazuo Ishiguro - No
Madame Bovary - Gustave Flaubert - No
A Fine Balance - Rohinton Mistry - No
Charlotte's Web - EB White - No
The Five People You Meet In Heaven - Mitch Albom - No
Adventures of Sherlock Holmes - Sir Arthur Conan Doyle - No
The Faraway Tree Collection - Enid Blyton - No
Heart of Darkness - Joseph Conrad - No
The Little Prince - Antoine De Saint-Exupery - No
The Wasp Factory - Iain Banks - No
Watership Down - Richard Adams - No
A Confederacy of Dunces - John Kennedy Toole - No
A Town Like Alice - Nevil Shute - No
The Three Musketeers - Alexandre Dumas - Yes
Hamlet - William Shakespeare - Yes
Charlie and the Chocolate Factory - Yes
Les Miserables - Victor Hugo - Yes

So I've read 18 of the 100 books. But the Harry Potter series is seven books, and Lord of the Rings is three more! That should count for something. And the entire works of Shakespeare shouldn't be listed as a single book.

Get over it

Your team has just traded for a player who is one of the best players in his sport, and has been for much of the last decade. We're talking about a lacrosse player who has the following credentials:

• NLL MVP
• NLL Championship (Rochester Knighthawks)
• NLL Championship game MVP
• MLL Offensive Player of the Year
• MLL MVP
• World Indoor Lacrosse Championship (Team Canada)
• Mann Cup (Peterborough Lakers)
• Mann Cup MVP

That's a pretty impressive list for any career. But consider this: those are John Grant, Jr.'s accomplishments in 2007 alone. Not listed here are his accomplishments in other years: rookie of the year awards (2), other championships (2 MLL, 2 Mann Cup, one World Indoor Lacrosse, one World Outdoor Lacrosse, one Heritage Cup), other MVP awards (2 more), and MLL Offensive Player of the Year awards (2 more). Guy's got more hardware than Home Depot.

So now this guy is on your team, and all you had to give up for him was a guy who has never played for your team in the first place, and you got for free anyway. Great news, right? Why would any fan be upset about acquiring such a player? Well, just ask Colorado fans how they feel about acquiring Grant last week. Not all of them think this was a great idea, in fact some are quite unhappy with the deal. Why? Because they don't think he's that good? Absolutely not. Nobody is arguing Grant's talent. It's because of a split second decision that Grant made back in December of 2006. Grant cross-checked Colorado defender John Gallant in the back of the head, knocking him out and getting himself a one-game suspension. Gallant was likely concussed – he was out six weeks and suffered headaches for a while – but luckily returned to the Mammoth. For Mammoth fans, this brought back a painful memory of the last game of Steve Moore's NHL career, before Todd Bertuzzi ended it.

Was Grant's hit a cheap shot? I personally didn't see it, but I can't imagine how a cross-check to the back of someone's head while they're walking away from you wouldn't be. Is Grant a goon? Not by a long shot, but I can't say he's the most sportsmanlike player I've ever seen either. We all know that lacrosse is an intense game played by passionate people, and passionate people sometimes make errors in judgement in the heat of the moment. John Gallant himself has said that he and Grant are friends and he's very much looking forward to playing together on the Mammoth, so he's forgiven Grant. It's easy to just say "Yo Colorado fans, it's been six years. Gallant only missed a few weeks and he himself is good with it, so just get over it." But that's much easier said than done.

Back in the early-mid 2000's (I can't remember exactly when it happened), the Philadelphia Wings were in Toronto to play the Rock. At some point in the game, the Wings' Dave Stilley and Toronto's Steve Toll started pushing and shoving each other and the gloves dropped. No more than a couple of punches were thrown before Stilley did something I had never seen before on a lacrosse floor and haven't seen since – he head-butted Toll, who instantly dropped to the floor. Stilley was booed relentlessly, and was tossed from the game. I don't remember if there was a suspension involved. Toll was out the rest of that game, but returned for the next game uninjured. To this day, I remember seeing Toll drop like he'd been shot. I remember the jaws of everybody in our row dropping open as we watched Stilley being dragged away. I remember the defiant look on Stilley's face, as if to say "Yeah, I went there, so don't fuck with me!" Ever since that game, the name Dave Stilley has represented to me the worst of violence in pro sports (well, up until Todd Bertuzzi grabbed it and hasn't let go). A couple of years ago I saw a picture of Stilley raising the 2001 Champions Cup in Toronto as a member of the Wings. The fact that you could see me in the background of the picture was pretty cool, but I couldn't stop staring at the C on his chest, stunned that he had at one point been chosen as captain of the Wings. As I read the tweets, blog posts, and message board postings about how ticked off some Mammoth fans were about the Grant trade, I immediately thought "Get over it, Mammoth fans". But then I wondered how I would have felt if the Rock had traded for Dave Stilley.

My first thought was "Well, that was different, because..." but then I couldn't think of how to finish that sentence. Both were cheap shots. Both could have caused devastating injuries or even been career-ending, but they weren't. Both players returned after a relatively short absence, and both continue to play well – interestingly, Toll played with Grant for five years on the Knighthawks and Gallant is now captain of the Mammoth and Grant's teammate. Both offenders were penalized and the incident subsequently considered closed by the league, the teams, and likely the players involved. But not the fans. The only real difference I can think of is that if Stilley were acquired by the Rock, it would have been a fairly minor deal, as Stilley was never a superstar. We could have still followed the Rock but hated Stilley, and it wouldn't have been that big a deal. Nobody would have cancelled their season tickets over it. But Grant is a superstar, and is expected to singlehandedly bring the Mammoth back to glory. If he succeeds and the Mammoth contend this year, it will be very difficult to cheer for a team led by a man you hate. Of course the other option would be to give up your lacrosse tickets. I cannot imagine doing this myself – I wouldn't give up my season tickets even if the Rock traded Colin Doyle for Dave Stilley straight-up. (Excuse me while I go and scrub my brain with steel wool for even thinking such a thing.) The only advice I can give Mammoth fans is to give it time and try to forgive, even if you can't forget.

Minority Report

NLL Scheduling

Scheduling in pro sports leagues is hard. I cannot imagine the complexity of the software that does scheduling for a league of 30 teams and 82 games (NHL, NBA) or 162 games (MLB). Even 16-game seasons like the NFL or NLL are pretty complex. You have to take into account arena availability (though many NBA, NHL, MLB, or NFL teams have first priority on the arena / stadium), how many games against division / conference opponents should there be, other league-imposed rules like the Maple Leafs must always play at 7pm on Saturday nights, and travel time (you can't have a home game in New York on Saturday and a road game in Vancouver on Sunday). In the NHL, you're talking about 30 teams and 82 games each, or 1230 games. That's gotta be a nightmare to schedule. I'm not sure if scheduling baseball would be easier or harder, since all their games are in groups of 3 or 4. So before I talk about the problems in the NLL scheduling, I want to say that I realize that this is a hard problem.

Having said that, the software that does the scheduling for the NLL has some flaws. Either that, or some of the league-imposed rules are a little silly. In the six seasons from 2005 to 2010 inclusive, here are some things I noticed:

• Rochester played in Colorado four times but Colorado only played in Rochester once.
• Colorado has had a weird schedule hosting teams from the East. Rochester has played there four times, Buffalo and Philly two, Toronto zero.
• Toronto never played in San Jose or Colorado, and the Stealth and Mammoth only played in Toronto once each. (Toronto did play the Washington Stealth once in 2010, but only in the Championship Game.)
• Buffalo and San Jose each hosted the other only once.
• San Jose hosted the Rock, the Bandits, and the Knighthawks once each, but Philly three times.
• Cal-Edm games in Calgary: ten. Cal-Edm games in Edmonton: six.
• Edm-Col games in Colorado: eight. Edm-Col games in Edmonton: five.
• Buf-Min games in Buffalo: eight. Buf-Min games in Minnesota: five.
• Neither Edmonton nor Calgary have ever played in Buffalo or Philadelphia, but they've played in Toronto four and six times respectively. The Bandits have played in Calgary once (plus one Championship game) and Edmonton twice, and Philly has played twice in Calgary and twice in Edmonton. Toronto has played five times in Edmonton and six in Calgary.

I get that the NLL wants teams from the same division to play each other more often, and I have no problem with that. But the Stealth were in San Jose for six seasons, and the only time they played the Rock was the last game of the sixth season in Toronto. In a league with this few teams, does it make sense to have two teams go almost six full seasons without meeting at all? And for the love of Jim Veltman, can we please do away with this supposed Canadian rivalry that doesn't exist? I think Calgary and Edmonton could have a good rivalry with each other because they're so close together (and already have rivalries in the NHL and CFL), but Toronto's main NLL rivals are the Bandits. A rivalry that's forced on the fans doesn't work, and it makes the scheduling problems even worse.

I'd love to see a system that allowed every team to play every other team at least once per season, but I understand that this may cause scheduling difficulties. But every other year should be doable. Now that there's five teams in each division (not that that is likely to last long – article on NLL stability coming soon), the scheduling could go something like:

• three games against other each team in the same division = twelve games (alternate 2 home + 1 away or 1 home + 2 away from year to year)
• one game against four of the five teams in the other division. That's four more games, totalling sixteen. The team that gets skipped changes from year to year, so you won't go more than one season without seeing any one team. Alternate home and away as well so you don't have a discrepancy that way.

Maybe this is just too difficult a problem for a simplistic solution like this to work. But the Toronto Rock and the Washington Power / Colorado Mammoth had a pretty good rivalry going back in the day, when they played each other in the semifinals three years in a row (2001 and 2002 as the Power and 2003 as the Mammoth). In the seven seasons since then, the Rock and the Mammoth have only played each other in the regular season once. Obviously, something is wrong with the current scheduling system.

Pattern matching

Here is another list of bands that have something in common, but this time I'm going to let you, dear reader, attempt to figure out what that is. These are all bands that have been active in the past ten years.

1. Matchbox Twenty
2. Blink 182
3. Sum 41
4. Eve 6
5. Maroon 5
6. Finger 11

If you're in a band and you can't come up with a name, just do what these guys all did: pick a random word and a random number and put them together. That's called creativity.

Halloween Pumpkins 2010

We had a good crop of pumpkins this year. Each of us did one and then I did a second one. Ryan actually stuck his hand inside the pumpkin and pulled the guts out! First time ever! Nicky was not so brave – he didn't want to get his hands messy, so Gail had to clean his out. We do not have mud-pie kids.

Halloween was dead this year! I've written this entire blog entry without being interrupted once by kids at the door – and it's currently 8:45. We bought a box of 95 mini chocolate bars and still have about 1/4 left – and I was giving two out to each kid. Didn't even open the second box. Our first year in this house, we went through almost three boxes @ 1 per kid.

	My Toronto Rock pumpkin. I printed out an image of the logo and Gail and I (mainly Gail) figured out how I could carve it into the pumpkin.
	Yes, I'm a geek. ;-)
	Gail did the kitty cat from a template, but added the stars herself.
	Ryan carved this one himself from a template. Pretty tricky.
	This was from a template as well, but once his pumpkin was cleaned out, Nicky carved it himself.

Smokers' so-called rights

There was a letter to the editor in the Hamilton Spectator today, in response to another letter from yesterday regarding the "rights" of smokers vs. non-smokers. Today's letter read:

We can debate this issue until the cows come home.

What I find intriguing is that non-smokers scream about their rights and their liberties, and how I as a smoker infringe upon them.

I say “ditto.” I, too, have a right to eat, shop and walk in an environment that is comfortable to me and not feel segregated or put down or looked down upon.

If I, as the letter writer says, wish to put as much nicotine and tar into my body as I like, let me do it when and where I wish.

Terri Hamm, Hamilton

I immediately wrote a reply and sent it in to the Spec:

You are obviously informed about the dangers of smoking and yet have chosen to smoke anyway. That's your right and I will not argue it with you. If you want to put that crap into your body, go ahead. You've made that decision. But while you are putting that crap into your body, you're putting that crap into the body of everyone around you as well, without their consent. Many others have made the decision NOT to put that crap into their bodies, and yet they're subjected to it anyway. This will happen if I simply stand near you - I don't need to interact with you or even know who you are. And you're arguing that you should have the RIGHT to subject others to your smoke?

If I want to drink myself into oblivion, that's my decision. But it's ludicrous for me to argue that I have the right to pour alcohol down the throats of everyone around me just so that I don't feel "looked down upon".

It is absolutely stunning to me that we actually have to have this argument. If you want to foul up your body with cigarettes, that's your decision and your right. But when your habit negatively affects my health, that's where your rights end. If I get drunk and harass people at the door of the local grocery store, I will be asked to leave and arrested if I don't. Nobody's health is in jeopardy here, customers are just being annoyed. But if I smoke near the door and compromise everyone's health, nobody cares and if they do, the smoker argues about "smokers' rights". I don't get it.

Yet another blockbuster

First Josh Sanderson was sent from Calgary to Boston for a buncha kids. Then just a couple of weeks ago, the Roughies sent Tracy Kelusky to Buffalo for a draft pick. And now in the third major trade of the offseason, John Grant Jr. leaves Rochester for Colorado in exchange for Matt Vinc. Combine this with some other trades (Snider, Paul Dawson, Conn, Moleski) and the Orlando Titans dispersal draft, and I can't remember an offseason when so many big name players were moved around.

I have to say I'm confused about one part of the trade, as reported by NLLInsider.com:

The Colorado Mammoth have confirmed the deal Insider reported on earlier today, the Mammoth sending Matt Vinc, Matt Zash, Brad Self and their first & third round picks in the 2012 entry draft to the Rochester Knighthawks in exchange for John Grant, Brad Self and Rochester’s first round picks in the 2011 and 2013 draft.

Odd that Brad Self finds himSelf (har) on both sides of the same trade. The second Brad Self there (the one going to Colorado) should actually be Mac Allen.

I found this trade a bit odd at first. One of Colorado's biggest problems over the last few years is the lack of a solid #1 goalie. They picked up the reigning Goaltender of the Year in the Titans dispersal draft, so problem solved, right? Wrong. Instead they improve their office by getting Grant. But then later in the day, they grabbed Matt King from Calgary. King is no Vinc, but he's an improvement over the committee the Mammoth had in goal last year (Levis, Leyshon, Palidwor, Tyacke). The Mammoth definitely needed a bump in the offense department – they scored more than 12 goals only four times last year. Adding Junior will help there, no question.

Being a Rock fan, I've seen Grant play a bunch of times and when he's on, there's arguably nobody better in the game today. (I'd be interested to know if anyone has scored more than Grant over the last ten years. Likely Tavares and maybe Doyle or Sanderson, but that's about it.) More often than I can count, I've seen him walking around the offensive zone, looking for someone to pass to, when he seems to just decide "I think I'll score now" and does. His behind-the-back goals are legendary, and I always laugh when I see some rookie run out in front of the net and try one, missing the net by three feet. Not only can he score, but he'll deal the ball as well – of course, when you play with guys like Gary Gait, Shawn Williams, Cory Bomberry, Craig Point, and the Evans boys, you've got some talented people to pass to. But just having Grant on the floor will help you. He's a big strong guy that pretty much requires double-teaming by two very capable defensemen, thereby leaving only three defenders to cover your remaining four forwards. This makes Grant deadly on the power play.

Now, this is not to say that Grant doesn't have his weaknesses. Here's a tip for all you western division defenders that haven't played against Grant often. (Aside: Write this date down in your calendars. It's not every day you see a man who's never played a lacrosse game in his life giving lacrosse advice to pros 20 years younger than him.) Here's how you reduce John Grant's effectiveness: PISS HIM OFF. Surely by now Grant is used to being double-teamed and hacked relentlessly by defenders, but now and again something makes him angry and he takes a dumb retaliatory penalty. Mission accomplished. More often than not after this happens, he's just not the same John Grant anymore. He loses his scoring touch (to some extent – you can't completely shut him down) and sometimes takes even more dumb penalties. This is what makes John Tavares so great – piss him off and he'll just score on you. I've seen Tavares take his share of dumb penalties as well, but not as often as Grant, and it doesn't seem to affect his scoring touch afterwards.

Rochester gives up some offense, but now has one of the most enviable goaltender tandems in the league. O'Toole was Goaltender of the Year in 2003 and has been at the top of anyone's goalie list for most of his career. Now with Vinc as the likely #1, O'Toole becomes the best backup goalie in the league.

But assuming Colorado doesn't make any more moves, they have King and either Palidwor or Levis as their goalies this season. This is an improvement over last year, even if it isn't as big an improvement as Vinc would have been. They've also improved their offense substantially, so when combined with the King deal, I'd say Colorado wins this trade.

Two blogs for the price of one

Not only will I be writing on my own blog (this here one), but this season I will also be writing for "the official un-official fan blog of the NLL" at nllblog.tumblr.com. I will be one of at least four writers on that site; the other three are based out of Edmonton but we hope to cover the entire league, not just the Rock and Rush. This is a new site, so I'm not sure what kind of readership we will have but regardless, it'll be fun. I will likely post any new lacrosse articles I write both here and there.