Hiatus

Well, here it is. I always see blogs I like going on hiatus, but they had huge readerships. I guess this will be nothing but a whimper in the history of hockey bloggers, but I can't put it off much longer. The Breakout Pass is going on hiatus. It's been coming for a while, but I guess the final decision came when Fisher was traded. I love Fisher, think he's a great player, and if I had the time, I'm sure I would've written a post condemning Murray for it...even though the return was more than most of us could hope for. And when I stared at the blog, thinking of an entry but coming up blank, I decided now is as good a time as any. Maybe someday, when I'm less occupied, I'll start jotting down more thoughts here. But, in the meantime, The Breakout Pass is on hiatus. Thanks to everyone who read my articles on a semi-regular basis, your support is appreciated.

Should Murray Be Re-Hired?

The term “dog days of summer” is used to refer to the hottest days of the season, and most baseball broadcasters use this term a lot to explain why some stadiums feel emptier than usual – the games seem to stretch on for an eternity and become less enjoyable because of the sweltering heat, and many fans would rather stay at home.

Although Ottawa is currently in the midst of a relatively mild winter, it seems that the same phenomenon can be observed: seemingly longer, duller games. Of course, this isn’t due to a lack of effort – the 2-1 SO loss to the Ducks last night and the 3-1 Sunday matinee loss to the Capitals both featured solid work but an L in the standings – but, despite most of the fan base accepting and even embracing the need for a re-build, there is a certain restlessness and lack of motivation among the team’s supporters. The tension has gotten so palpable that many fans are clamouring for Murray and/or Clouston to be shit-canned effective immediately, if only for the sake of making a move. Most would agree that even mass layoffs couldn’t turn this season around, and while I wouldn’t shed a tear for our erstwhile coach, I wonder if letting go of Murray at this point wouldn’t be a step backwards.

After 3 1/2 seasons as Ottawa’s GM, Murray’s strengths and weaknesses at the position have become more or less common knowledge among the fans. Consensus is that he’s excellent at depth-for-depth moves (Nycholat for Shannon and Schaefer for Donovan come to mind) and lights-out at drafting (Karlsson, Cowen, Lehner and even lower-drafted players like Zack Smith and Mike Hoffman look like solid picks). On the other hand, he has been unsuccessful at dealing draft picks for talent (Campoli for a 1st, Sutton for a 2nd), trading bigger names (the Vermette deal is still criticized, while many wonder if he could have gotten more out of the Heatley fiasco) and foraging into the UFA pile (Gonchar, Kovalev). These shortcomings, plus his legendary insistence that a 2nd round pick be thrown into every deal, have turned a once-loyal fan base against him. It hasn’t helped his case, either, that he had to fire two coaches. In his defence, though, he may have been justified in getting rid of Hartsburg and Paddock.

But why keep him? Well, to start, with the Trade Deadline just 41 days away, it would be unwise to fire him before the season is out and his contract is up. It would be difficult to get a good GM in-season, let alone one who would be knowledgeable enough to know which players to cut ties with. So, let’s assume that the window for firing him in-season is closed. Now, look at the situation from Murray’s perspective: your contract expires at the end of the year. You’re the scapegoat, whether justified or not, for many of the team’s problems. After this year, it’s unlikely that you get a full-time GM job anywhere in the NHL. Any progress made at this deadline towards the rebuild process will likely have no impact on you, since it appears that, for all intents and purposes, you’ll be out of a job no matter what.

I ask you this: Where’s your motivation to do a good job?

Realistically, our favourite Shawvillian with a lisp would have no reason to get personally invested. He wouldn’t even need to fake it for future employment elsewhere, and while he may take an active interest from purely an integrity level, it may be wiser to let a GM who will want the team to succeed have control.

So, here’s what I propose: re-sign Bryan for one more year. Let him handle the trade deadline and hope his love for players he’s personally coached won’t get in the way. Come draft time, let him do what he does best and secure us some future talent. In the meantime, hire a competent assistant GM – Fenton (NSH), Billington (COL) and McGuire (TSN) are the popular names – making it clear that they are being groomed for the full-time GM job. Give the new hire the season to get adjusted to the team, the way of operating and the players, specifically which ones he wants to keep and which he wants to dump at the deadline. Ideally, by the end of the season, Murray will have gradually stepped away, handing the GM reins to the new guy and possibly settling into a spot on the scouting staff, depending on how well he cooperates with the plan. Clearly, he’s got an eye for talent. Why not let him focus on what he’s good at?

One important caveat that would have to be made to keep GMBM in the fold, though: any free agency signing cannot have a NTC and should not be for any longer than 2-3 years. Any longer would result in Billington/Fenton/McGuire/whoever having their hands tied once they take over. Yes, this likely means that Richards, Parise and Semin aren’t coming here, but would one of them really push us to a playoff spot? My gut says no. Beyond those three, the UFA/RFA market is pretty shallow at F and D. As for goaltending, I’m positive the Sens could find a decent goaltender willing to take a two or three year deal. Shouldn’t be an issue.

So, I put the question to you: which method do you prefer for long-term success? A gradual, measured change of philosophy without rocking the boat, or a sudden replacement of the GM and an uncertainty of the team’s direction, yet again?

Best Interests

First things first, I apologize for the long wait between posts. Between exams, the holidays and, quite honestly, a lack of motivation to watch this struggling product, I haven't had much time or interest in watching Sens games, even though I've still been following them religiously. Haven't had too much to say, either, since it would more than likely all be derivative of the rampant public opinion that this team needs to have dynamite stuck in each and every crevasse of its being, fuses lit, in the hopes of blowing apart the team's foundation and starting fresh.

But I digress. This team hasn't won a single game since Jason Spezza's been injured, and despite semi-strong efforts against the Blackhawks and the Lightning, wins have still eluded us. We play the Bruins on Tuesday, the same Bruins who have lost 4 of their last 5 games (although, in fairness, three of those losses came in overtime or a shootout). They do play Monday in Pittsburgh before touching down here, so the next three games (Boston, New York Islanders, Calgary) provide us with the best chance at winning any games at all in the near future. Taking a look at the standings, though, is it in our best interest to be winning games like these?

23	BUFFALO	41	18	18	5	41
24	CALGARY	42	18	20	4	40
25	FLORIDA	40	18	20	2	38
26	OTTAWA	42	16	20	6	38
27	TORONTO	40	16	20	4	36
28	EDMONTON	40	13	20	7	33
29	NY ISLANDERS	39	13	20	6	32
30	NEW JERSEY	41	10	29	2	22

(taken from NHL.com)

Considering the games we have in hand over the Islanders, it's plausible that they could catch up to us. Likewise, Toronto could also pass us and, given their recent play, it's a real possibility. I'm not advocating losing for the sake of a higher draft pick, don't get me wrong. The Senators should absolutely be trying to win, game in and game out. That said, if recent trends are any indication, maybe this team just doesn't have the skill to win when they need to. If that's the case, then this would be the worst possible time, from a future point of view, to turn the season around. A win against Boston may not be the wort-case scenario, but what about wins against NYI and/or CAL? Those would push us out of the bottom 5, and therefore out of a lottery pick.

It's a sad attestation to the state of this franchise that discussion of losing out for a top pick is even entering the discussion. But between losing streaks, shaky play offensively and defensively, personnel turmoil and a fanbase that has grown impatient since seeing this team miss the playoffs only once in the past 13 years, prospects and the potential to grab another blue-chipper are the only potential bright spots to be taken out of this season.

Stop the madness.

Assuming the status quo is intact, tonight's game against the Wild will mark Brian Lee's 26th consecutive game as a healthy scratch. Though the tale of Brian Lee has been told and re-told, and the laments of taking him over Kopitar and Mark Staal have been heard ad nauseum, at what point do the expectations drop, if ever? He is by no means a bad player, just caught in an awkward situation. His agent's pushing and Murray's acceptance in giving Lee a one-way contract has limited Lee's options pretty severely. At this point, the Senators can either sit him while they try to find a trade partner or send him down to Binghamton and risk losing him at half-price if they need to call him back up.

But wait, there's a third option! How about actually playing the kid? If Murray is pushing Lee in trade offers, why not play him, showcasing him to the league's GMs? It seems irresponsible to allow an asset to sit and not let him develop his play in game situations. Further, if we don't play him now, and we can't find a taker for his one-way contract this season or next, then it's a virtual certainty that we're letting a former 9th overall pick walk away for nothing. We discuss Ottawa's poor asset management regularly -- letting Chara walk, getting scraps for Havlat, trading Tim Gleason and Brooks Laich for Bryan Smolinski and Peter Bondra.

At this point, getting ANYTHING for Lee is most likely impossible, or Murray would have already pulled the trigger. If there's no league-wide interest in Lee, what good is served from letting him sit? The whole team has been nothing short of an unmitigated train wreck this season. Is the message Clouston and Murray are sending that even our current defense is better than putting in Lee? I don't see it.

Don't get me wrong, I'm not a fan of Lee's, nor do I expect I ever will be. Some of that can be attributed to his being a product of the Muckler era, and the rest to the fact that he never takes the body. To treat a former top prospect so badly, though, is just not right, especially when slotting him in as a 6th defenseman couldn't possibly hurt your team any more than it already is hurting. Besides, it's not like he's getting any more attractive to GMs, sitting up in the press box.

I just hope, for both his sake and that of the Senators, that Lee can find a team where he can show why he was drafted so high. It's clear that day will never come in Ottawa.

Same Old Song and Dance

Though Martin Gerber is often mocked for looking, and occasionally playing like the Gerber baby, last night's match made him seem much more like the military knife of the same name. Not because he was sharp or precise, but because watching the Senators lose to the last-place Oilers so spectacularly was about as much fun as being stabbed with one of these.

And really, what can be said in anyone's defence? The entire offense was invisible, the defense gave up chance after chance, Elliott was his usual mediocre self, the crowd sounded flat (though, in fairness that may have just been Sportsnet). Hell, the only goal scored came off an Oilers defenseman's skate. And this wasn't exactly the Darth Gerber we all fell in love with for the two weeks where he was good in Ottawa -- he nearly scored on himself in the middle of the second, for christ's sake!

At this point, though, I'm at as much of a loss as anyone as to how this can be fixed or salvaged. Any trade at this point will be a reactionary one, similar to the Stillman-Commodore deal a few years back. Trading scraps for proven players seems unlikely at this point, and our assets are just too severely undervalued right now to get anything of worth. At the same time, though, something has got to be done. The team needs a shakeup. Some emotion. Anything.

We can always hope that Dany Douchebag's return on Thursday will spark some kind of emotion among the players. It's definitely got the fans going, obviously, and anti-Heatley stories are already popping up all over the Sun, Citizen and online with no sign of relenting until puck drop. Personally, I'm really looking forward to not only the game, but the fans' reactions as well. Something tells me that the Gap-Toothed Asshole will be getting more than just a shower of boos; fans boo players who did nothing wrong to us, like Chara and Havlat.

No, I'm expecting at least a few "Heat-ley Sucks" and "Fuck You Heat-ley" chants, maybe a couple of jerseys making their way to the ice, and it wouldn't surprise me to see an effigy of the overpaid whiny glory boy burning in front of SBP. Anything you guys want to see happen, aside from the obvious curb-stomping of the Sharks and their "all-star" winger who wanted more options that weren't Edmonton?

On the B-Sens...

I got an opportunity to check out the Binghamton Senators take on the Hamilton Bulldogs at Scotiabank Place last night (thanks again for the ticket, @CassiieD!) and, as someone who doesn't get much of a chance to check out the farm team, thought I might take a moment to list a few thoughts on the "stars of the future" like Martin St. Pierre Patrick Wiercioch, Robin Lehner and others.

• Jim O'Brien was one of the best-looking players out there. He dug into corners, got the puck to open players, and played an all-around gritty game. My GOD does he need a haircut, though. Just saying.
• Oh, while I'm on about Jimbo, new nickname idea: O-B-Jim. Eh? Eh?
• Patrick Wiercioch was pretty much invisible for most of the game. He made a few nice passes about halfway through the third, but for a supposed offensive defenceman, he need to be more visible out there. He's still a few years off.
• Robin Lehner looked solid. He reminded me a bit of regular season Patty Lalime. Coincidence, he also wears the same number. So, here's hoping he changes his number to 1 for the playoffs...
• Bobby Butler and Corey Locke, the so-called "dynamic duo", looked a bit weak last night. All of Butler's shots were either hesitant, resulting in deflections off Bulldogs' sticks, or wide of the net. Locke, meanwhile, wasn't feeding him the puck and was really weak on faceoffs.
• Another player who really impressed was Colin Greening. All night long, he made the smart play. Assuming he continues developing, Greening could be a great 4th-liner on the big club.
• Lastly, and this is more of a question to anyone who was at the game... anyone know why the Bulldogs pulled Sanford after the 1st?
  

Team's Lack of Offense is Offensive

What do you mean, that's the wrong kind of "no offense"?

Last night's "game" against the Stars was a real eye-opener -- please note that I use the word "game" very lightly, as games are supposed to be fun and entertaining, not so boring that they lull you to sleep -- insofar as the team's complete lack of goal-scoring prowess. Sure, our favourite scapegoats, the goaltenders, haven't been stellar. Common consensus is that our defense is softer than Alex Daigle's nurse uniform and more apathetic than an emo kid. Hell, you know it's bad when popular opinion is that a future phenom who's been a bit light on the physical play should be scratched for a journeyman 7th defenseman.

But beyond that, how often do you see anyone attacking the team's offense, or lack thereof? After scoring seven goals in the past seven games, you can bet that these articles will start popping up everywhere, but the bare facts are simple: with goaltenders like Pascal Leclaire and Brian Elliott, you need more than one goal per game to win. And the "regular contributors" sure as hell aren't helping issues.

Players who were counted on to bring a scoring touch this year have been very hit and miss. Some, like Spezza, are maintaining their usual production. Others, like Alfredsson and Kovalev, are exceeding expectations so far. But the vast majority of the offense lines -- the Michaleks, Regins, Folignos and Fishers of the team -- just aren't cutting it. Together, they've combined for 32 points through the first 22 games of the season. To put this in perspective, that's the same amount of points that Alfredsson and Gonchar have, combined.

Of course, no one expected any of the secondary scorers to be competing with a top-tier guy like Alfie or Spezza. But when Alfredsson is nearly doubling the scoring pace of Regin or Michalek, that's a sign that the secondary isn't doing its job.

Adding to the struggles of the four aforementioned players...

• Jarkko Ruutu and Chris Neil have only got one goal each on the season.
  
• Our defence (combined) has accounted for 10G, 29A.
  
• Milan Michalek has the team's second best shooting percentage among regulars (14.3%) but is only 8th on the team in shots (35). Maybe he needs to shoot more?!
  
• Two young goal-scorers, Regin and Foligno, have the third-worst and worst shooting percentages, respectively, among Sens forwards. (2.9% for Regin, 0% for Foligno)
  

At some point, something has got to be done to fix this glaring problem. We've tried stacking the top line, that didn't work. We tried spreading the offense out. That didn't work. We've tried everything short of, y'know, actually scoring. What would you do to fix this, readers?

Friday's game at Pittsburgh is an afternoon game (1 p.m.). Hope they do better offensively, or you'll be reading an article from me after I get back from the Binghamton game, insisting that we call up Butler and Locke and send down Shannon and Winchester.