Skip to content

Poll: Which has been the most disappointing Canadian team?

Mar 27, 2014, 1:11 PM EDT

Toronto Maple Leafs v Edmonton Oilers Getty Images

If the NHL playoffs started today, the Montreal Canadiens would be the only Canadian team to qualify.

By itself, that’s a story. There are seven teams from Canada in the league, and it’s not like they’re at a huge financial disadvantage compared to their American brethren. Only the Ottawa Senators have what might be deemed attendance issues. The rest play in front of full houses, and the tickets aren’t cheap.

On top of that is the fact a Canadian team hasn’t won the Stanley Cup since 1993. Which is, frankly, one of the more amazing droughts in pro sports. Five times since 1993 a Canadian team has been to the Cup final, and five times it’s lost. And…AND…four times it’s lost in seven games, including twice by the Canucks, a team that’s never won the Cup.

Which brings us to the poll. We’re not going to include Montreal, for obvious reasons. And we’re also not going to include Calgary, because a vote for the Flames — a team nobody expected anything from this season — would just be downright wrong.

So here are the five candidates:

Ottawa — Lost the face of the franchise, Daniel Alfredsson, to Detroit over money, and also because he thought the Wings had a better chance to win. The Sens have been absolutely dreadful since the Olympic break and would need an absolute miracle to make the playoffs.

Winnipeg — Showed signs of life when Claude Noel was fired and replaced by Paul Maurice. Alas, the Jets have since gone back into a slumber, winning just twice in their last 11 games. The things is, this team is far from bereft of talent. If it played in a big Canadian market, its failures would get a lot more attention.

Vancouver — On pace to miss the playoffs for the first time since 2008. We’re not going to list all the things that have contributed to the Canucks’ nightmarish season, but if we had to pick a low point, it would probably be allowing seven third-period goals to the Islanders…at home…in a must-win game…that they led 3-0 after two periods. Because you really hate to do that.

Toronto — The Leafs are still alive in the playoff race, but we had to include them in the poll because they’re on the verge of their third epic choke job in the last three seasons. In 2011-12, it was a regular-season collapse. Last year, the collapse came in Game 7 of the first round. Even if they do manage to sneak in to the postseason, serious concerns will remain about a team that gives up more shots than any in the league and seems to wilt under the pressure of playing in Toronto.

Edmonton — This was supposed to be the season the Oilers — featuring three first overall picks — made a legitimate run at the playoffs. Instead, they’ll probably finish ahead of only one team, the Buffalo Sabres. The sight of fans throwing jerseys on the ice hasn’t helped the situation. Nor did the water fight between the star player and rookie coach.

OK, go vote:

  1. rdk - Mar 27, 2014 at 1:13 PM

    Deadmonton. When you have a drug dealing owner buying politicians and draft picks, it’s sweet sweet karma that they suck so bad.

    • drewsylvania - Mar 27, 2014 at 1:22 PM

      But nobody expected them to be good. Even with tons of high draft picks, they suck every year.

  2. btlpper68 - Mar 27, 2014 at 1:17 PM

    Canucks sens leafs have all had struggles but nothing loss to the oilers

    • btlpper68 - Mar 27, 2014 at 1:17 PM


  3. billiamsofdollars - Mar 27, 2014 at 1:19 PM

    Nice rack

    • prd797 - Mar 27, 2014 at 1:27 PM

      I have a sneaking suspicion she has no idea what that sign is implying.

      It’s either insanely optimistic or brutally cruel.

      • DED - Mar 27, 2014 at 2:41 PM

        Either way, he better come to his senses and marry her.

      • JoeAvg - Mar 27, 2014 at 3:01 PM

        “I had no reason to be over optimistic
        But somehow when you smiled I could brave bad weather”

      • imleftcoast - Mar 27, 2014 at 3:06 PM

        or she’s not his girlfriend and relieved

    • therooneyskilledwebster - Mar 27, 2014 at 4:37 PM

      His wife can’t wait for the Leafs to finally win.

  4. georgejarkko - Mar 27, 2014 at 1:25 PM

    I think Toronto has to be the biggest disappointment not to make the playoffs this year, but Edmonton has to be the most disappointing franchise of the group.

    • Nathan Beck - Mar 27, 2014 at 1:54 PM

      If you want to talk about disappointing franchises you should probably include all of them except Vancouver.

      Out of that list Edmonton and Ottawa are the only teams to make it out of the first round since the 04-05 lockout. (Calgary hasn’t either)

      Out of that list three of those teams have made it to the playoffs only once since the 04-05 lockout.

      • dueman - Mar 27, 2014 at 3:45 PM

        I’m guessing that Mr Beck here is a Canucks fan…

  5. prd797 - Mar 27, 2014 at 1:25 PM

    People had thought Ottawa could be legitimate contenders, and here they are about to miss the playoffs. With the talent they have, that should not be happening. Big letdown for them.

    None of the other teams have been quite as disappointing to me, personally.

    I expected Calgary and Edmonton to continue to be tyre fires: they have not failed in doing so.

    Montreal makes the playoffs: not really that surprising.

    Toronto hovering right around the bubble: sounds about right.

    Vancouver and Tortorella not working out: I could have seen it going either way, but I am not particularly shocked.

    Winnipeg has also generally hovered around the bubble too. As good as they played when Maurice first got there, it was never going to be enough to make up for the poor effort under Noel.

    • atwatercrushesokoye - Mar 27, 2014 at 4:16 PM

      You have no idea what you’re talking about if you think Calgary is a tire fire, they’re a team that other teams talk about how hard they are to play against.
      -They’ve played in 44 one goal games this year…44! This isn’t a team that get’s blown out often, they’re in every game, which leads me to:
      -Since the Vancouver incident in mid January the Flames have either won or have pulled the goalie with a legitimate chance to tie in EVERY single game.
      -They’re the highest scoring team in the NHL since the Olympics
      -They’ve had a bunch of rookies playing getting valuable experience this year
      -Their captain would be a legitimate Norris trophy Candidate if he were in the east

      If you just go by their record, yes Calgary is in the bottom 5 in the league, if you go by the way they’ve actually and who they’ve beaten and how you would realise this looks like a team who will be good sooner rather than later.

  6. JoeAvg - Mar 27, 2014 at 1:26 PM

    That chick better start lookin elsewhere for husband.

  7. kingcobraman - Mar 27, 2014 at 1:32 PM

    its a shame about a cdn team not winning the cup.. every team that has won a cup is full of cdn.. and yes Edmonton is the worst team in Canada…

  8. dtownbeatdown - Mar 27, 2014 at 1:45 PM

    Don’t take this the wrong way, but I don’t get why Montreal is not on there. They have the richest history, and the most championships, but they have been pretty irrelevant for the good part of 20 years. They just don’t seem to be a threat even when they make the playoffs, and that is just too bad. Not a bad franchise, just a disappointing 20 years.

    But for the most disappointing, I would say Vancouver. Biggest choke artists in the league.

    I am a Detroit fan, but I do hope the Canadian teams become more relevant, makes the game more fun to watch.

    • rdk - Mar 27, 2014 at 2:25 PM

      A depleted Montreal team took Boston to overtime in game 7 the year they bought the cup (which was better than Vancouver did).

      They also made it the conference finals the year prior, after making the two top seeds cry (Pens and Caps).

      That’s a better recent history than every other Canadian team and also Detroit. Dtown hasn’t made it past the 2nd round in that time frame and aren’t even likely to make the playoffs this year.

      Let’s also talk about the Detroit’s rich history of making the playoffs only twice between 1966 and 1983.

      • pastabelly - Mar 27, 2014 at 2:40 PM

        How did Boston “buy” the Cup? That’s a new one. :)

        By Montreal’s standards, they have had a disappointing 20 years. However, as you say, so has he whole country.

      • rdk - Mar 27, 2014 at 2:48 PM

        Well Jeremy Jacobs, the chairman of the NHL’s board of governors that year changed the NHL bylaws to require a larger percentage of owners to disagree with him in order to defeat his motions and then used his power to give Bettman a massive multi-million dollar contract extension.

      • dtownbeatdown - Mar 27, 2014 at 3:26 PM

        Whoa don’t get beat up over it rdk, if anything I was giving Montreal a compliment, wishing they were in the show more often. But if you have to go all the way back to 1983 to tell me when my team was not very good… well thanks. I was -3 years old in 1983.

        So Montreal has made it to the final 4 teams in the playoffs in the past 20 years twice? Again that is disappointing.

        You can’t really insult a wings fan when we have been nothing but spoiled in the past 20 years. You made it to the conference finals twice in those years, we won the cup 4 times. Which would you prefer? (not to mention a 22 year playoff streak)

        And Detroit barely made it into the playoffs last year, and we were the only team to give Chicago a little anxiety by going to 7 games, when people like you thought we wouldnt of made the playoffs at all, just like this year… even though we are playing with an AHL team and still holding our own.

        By the way, how did Boston buy a cup again? Ignorance is strength for some.

      • dtownbeatdown - Mar 27, 2014 at 3:29 PM

        Actually here is a better question rdk, I am 27 and have witnessed 4 stanley cups, and banners raised. How many cups have you seen your team win in your lifetime?… I will wait.

      • rdk - Mar 27, 2014 at 3:48 PM

        I was around in the 70s, so you lose.

      • dtownbeatdown - Mar 27, 2014 at 9:52 PM

        Rdk… it is quite obvious you lost. You were “around” in the 70s. You joker. I was around I’m the 50s too as a sperm.

    • joey4id - Mar 27, 2014 at 3:10 PM

      The answer is really simple. Everything changed in 1963 when the NHL introduced the Amateur/Entry draft.

      “The Amateur Draft was instituted by NHL President Clarence Campbell as a means of phasing out the sponsorship of amateur teams by the league’s member clubs. The NHL wanted to create what Campbell called “a uniform opportunity for each team to acquire a star player.” Prior to the creation of the draft NHL teams would sponsor amateur teams and players, pre-empting other NHL clubs from acquiring new, young talent, and limiting amateur players’ prospects in the NHL to the team which sponsored them.”

      Many of the players who made up the Hab’s championship teams in 50, 60, and early 70s were from the era prior to the draft. Montreal would have first bid on players in the Quebec.

      The Canadiens actually bought a whole league to force the hand of it’s star player to join the Habs in 1952.

      • rdk - Mar 27, 2014 at 3:17 PM

        That’s not even close to being true. Montreal acquired all of their Quebec-born *superstars* through traditional means like the amateur draft. It was only fringe players that were eligible for protection using regional rights. Furthermore, teams like Toronto, Detroit, etc. also benefited from the same regional rights that you cited, but since players from Ontario and the US were not as good as Quebecers, people like you conveniently leave that out.


      • joey4id - Mar 27, 2014 at 4:46 PM

        rdk, I’m not certain which part of my comment you disagree with.
        The draft was instituted in 1963.

        Canadiens signed former captain Jean Beliveau in 1946.

        The Canadiens bought the QSHL and converted it from an amateur league to a minor pro league. This forced Béliveau to join the Canadiens for the 1953–54 NHL season.

        Montreal won the cup 6 times between 1950-1962

        All of the players who won cups following the draft in 1963 were already property of the Montreal Canadiens before the draft. (Beliveau, Provost, Cournoyer, Backstrom, Richard x2, Rousseau, Ferguson, JC & Gilles Tremblay, Hodge, Lemaire etc…….) (65, 66,68)

        After two fine campaigns with the Montreal Junior Canadiens of the Quebec Major Junior Hockey League, the NHL Montreal Canadiens – in the final year the team had the privilege to do so – invoked its right to select two French Canadian players first and second overall to pick Tardif in the first round, second overall, of the 1969 NHL Amateur Draft. And there are others my friend.

        1971 Cup most of the start players were from the teams in the 60s

        Just make sure you have your ducks aligned if you’re going to call me a liar.

      • rdk - Mar 27, 2014 at 4:54 PM

        So you’re agreeing with me that players from Ontario and the US used to be really bad at hockey and that Quebecers were free to sign with any of the other teams in the league through free agency because the regional rights system that you’ve cited didn’t exist prior to the implementation of the amateur draft?

      • JoeAvg - Mar 27, 2014 at 4:54 PM

        Sorry rdk but joey’s right on this one. In fact, the Habs won the right to claim one French player as their’s even after the draft was instituted for a while. The last player claimed under this provision was, I believe, Guy Lafleur. Hardly a fringe player.

      • joey4id - Mar 27, 2014 at 5:11 PM

        The mid 70s team who won the cup only had one player drafted via the standard entry draft. Pollack secured the first round pick in 1971 following a trade with the California Golden Seals. I believe Marc Tardif was the last player to get drafted under the provision awarded to the Habs.

        “The Habs’ general manager, Sam Pollock, was keen to find a way to trade to obtain the first overall pick in the 1971 amateur draft. He persuaded California Golden Seals owner Charlie Finley to trade the Seals’ 1971 first-round pick and François Lacombe in return for Montreal’s 1970 first-round pick and veteran Ernie Hicke. However, late in the 1970-71 season the Los Angeles Kings were in last place overall, behind the Seals. The Kings were in danger of “beating” the Seals out for last place, and if this happened Pollock would lose his first overall pick. Pollock traded the aging Ralph Backstrom to the Kings for two players. Backstrom’s presence lifted the Kings out of last place, and the Seals finished at the bottom, granting the Habs the first pick. Pollock hesitated between Lafleur and Marcel Dionne, but chose Lafleur with his overall no.1 pick.”

      • rdk - Mar 27, 2014 at 4:58 PM

        Guy Lafleur: Drafted 1st Overall in the 1971 Entry Draft`

      • rdk - Mar 27, 2014 at 4:58 PM

        Guy Lafleur: Drafted 1st Overall in the 1971 Entry Draft`

      • joey4id - Mar 27, 2014 at 5:12 PM

        The only french canadian superstar on the SC teams 70s who was drafted

      • rdk - Mar 27, 2014 at 5:17 PM

        What part about regional rights being applied equally to all teams do you not understand?

        Also, why do you keep referring to players who were acquired by the Habs before the regional rights system was even created in 1963?

      • joey4id - Mar 27, 2014 at 5:35 PM

        What part about regional rights being applied equally to all teams do you not understand?

        Why are you talking about this? My point was that before the draft in 1963 Montreal had first crack at the players playing in Quebec. Beliveau, Lapointe, Savard were not drafted. Tardif was drafted under a provision awarded to Montreal for a few years after the 1963 draft.

        Courtesy of therooneyskilled Webster, “At that time, Quebec was churning out talent left and right and was a hockey mecca for development. The team was able to essentially get first pick of the litter in regards to top French Canadian-born players, housed those players in their farm system, and signed those players to C forms at the ripe age of 18.

        Also, why do you keep referring to players who were acquired by the Habs before the regional rights system was even created in 1963?

        Because you wrote “That’s not even close to being true. Montreal acquired all of their Quebec-born *superstars* through traditional means like the amateur draft.” Which was a follow up to my post, and didn’t make sense because the Quebec-Born stars from the 60s were not acquired through traditional means like the amateur draft. The first Quebec born SS was Lafleur who was drafted in 1971. He was the only Quebec born SS to have been and played for the cup champions in the mid 70s.

      • rdk - Mar 27, 2014 at 5:51 PM

        What are you talking about? I can’t make this more clear: There was no regional rights system at that time!

        The regional rights system was implemented in 1963 alongside the amateur draft. It’s not relevant to the discussion about any free agent signings made prior to 1963. None of the players that you cited were acquired under regional rights provisions.

        Montreal’s succeeded because other teams didn’t actively scout amateur players in Quebec and couldn’t even communicate with them in french even if they had tried to sign them, which they didn’t.

        Don’t blame the Canadiens because Quebecers used to be the best at playing hockey and also managing a hockey team.

        The problem with other teams of that era was equal parts lack of vision, incompetence, and a dearth of talent coming out of the rest of Canada and the US.

      • joey4id - Mar 27, 2014 at 5:57 PM

        Why should I blame the Canadiens? I just stated facts. And you got all bent saying that what I wrote wasn’t even close to being true. Fine! You’re right about whatever the argument is about.

      • rdk - Mar 27, 2014 at 6:12 PM

        The Maple Leafs *choosing* not to pursue amateur players from Quebec due to ignorance or incompetence does not give you a license to re-write history and incorrectly state that the regional rights system of the 1960s, which applied equally to all teams, somehow applied to one team’s free agents signings made in the 1940s and 50s. It just doesn’t make any sense and isn’t even close to the truth.

  9. terrier92 - Mar 27, 2014 at 2:05 PM

    Toronto has been disappointing its fans since 1967. That’s an epic fail

  10. faceoff77 - Mar 27, 2014 at 2:06 PM

    How can the Leafs be a disappointment? Every year they are expected to disappoint. They are consistently meeting expectations. By definition, they are not disappointing.

    • pastabelly - Mar 27, 2014 at 2:27 PM

      The Leafs made the playoffs last year and took the Bruins to seven games and much more was expected of them.

      Edmonton has been in last so many years in a row and nobody should have expected more.

      Ottawa and Winipeg are in the general area we all expected.

      Vancouver’s decline has been steady and they couldn’t even do deadline deals right.

      I would split my vote between Vancouver and Toronto. Hard to believe that only one Canadian team will be in Playoffs.

    • stcrowe - Mar 27, 2014 at 2:39 PM

      The Leafs disappoint because their fans keep expecting them to show progress from the following year, then they get a glimmer of hope, only to have it cruelly snatched away.

      I am not a Leafs fan, but I live in the area, and it is quite amazing how quickly the team drives its fans from optimism to despair, often in a matter of mere weeks.

    • nothanksimdriving123 - Mar 27, 2014 at 2:52 PM

      Indeed, I expected them to be pretty good this season, and that is what they have been, pretty good. They’ve won more than they have lost and still have a chance at making the playoffs. Pretty good, not very good and certainly not excellent. They made few moves at improving from last season, and one of them, Bolland, has missed most of the season, so my expectations have been modest.

  11. bruinsfan55 - Mar 27, 2014 at 2:31 PM

    I’d say Vancouver. I mean coming off a SCF game 7 appearance 3 years but they still have been consistently a good regular season team who usually makes the playoffs. I guess Torts really isn’t that good of a coach after all now, is he?

  12. sjsharks66 - Mar 27, 2014 at 2:34 PM

    I would have to put the Oilers in the same category as the Flames. Did anyone think they would be a playoff team this year. So instead of the easy answer that is Edmonton. I would have to go with the Canucks. How are you going to ditch Schneider and Lou? The Sedin twins can’t get it going this season, which I believe is very shocking. Burrows can’t stay healthy. Now that the goalie drama is gone, they have drama with Kesler. Torts metldown against the Flames. At the beginning of the season I did not picture this bad of a year for the Canucks. This off season they really need to ditch their GM and Owner. Torts obviously has no say on how the team is ran.

  13. joey4id - Mar 27, 2014 at 3:02 PM

    I don’t get why we compare Cdn teams to US teams when we’re looking at the SC Champion. It’s not like the players come from the team’s respective cities, or countries for that matter. The only true measure of the best hockey country is when it involves international competition with each player playing for their country.

    Note: in the last 20 years the SC winning coach was a CDN 17 times. The coach on the losing team in the SCF was Canadian 19 times. So, why are we comparing exactly?

    The Amateur Draft, as it was called, was instituted in 1963 precisely to level the playing field.

    • therooneyskilledwebster - Mar 27, 2014 at 5:14 PM

      …Then there was the infamous C form. The C form was contract given out by 18-year old amateur players during the
      Original Six Era for sole negotiating rights to that player – an NHL contract I.O.U of sorts. The Canadiens’ scouting staff would scour North America for the best young talent around. If they found a player they liked, more often than not, a C form would be awarded.

      “…each NHL franchise had exclusive rights to players within its 50-mile territorial limits. So the Leafs and Canadiens could browse the neighbourhood rinks near Toronto and Montreal at their leisure, while the Rangers had a lock on the next great goalie from Hoboken.

      At that time, Quebec was churning out talent left and right and was a hockey mecca for development. The team was able to essentially get first pick of the litter in regards to top French Canadian-born players, housed those players in their farm system, and signed those players to C forms at the ripe age of 18. Swell, isn’t it?

      “However, this process could not be changed overnight. In each of the drafts from 1963 to 1968 there were very few quality players available. This problem developed because most of the best young players had already signed the C form. This meant that the only players eligible for the draft were players who had not signed a C form. It wasn’t until 1969 that the draft became a true amateur draft as the C form faded into history.” –

      See more at:

  14. garybrian - Mar 27, 2014 at 3:24 PM

    They all suck!

  15. jacketsfan7 - Mar 27, 2014 at 4:55 PM

    “When the leafs win the cup, I’ll marry my girlfriend” *Dies Alone*

  16. jacketsfan7 - Mar 27, 2014 at 4:56 PM

    I probably shouldn’t be talking I’m a blue jackets fan😂

  17. Lupy Nazty Philthy - Mar 27, 2014 at 6:35 PM

    All the Canadian teams are depressing… Canada is to blame too. The TMZ style media coverage, the insane taxes they charge athletes, the nuisance of being a celebrity.

    It’s why no top free agents ever sign with Canadian teams anymore. When was the last time a top UFA even signed with a Canadian team? Most Canadian teams have to overpay just to get overrated hasbeens. Like Clarkson, Briere, etc,

    Why play for Toronto or Vancouver or Edmonton, etc, pay way more taxes than guys on American teams, get constantly annoyed by Canada’s ridiculous hockey media and the overzealous fans, oh… and the weather sucks…

    I love the Leafs, but if I was a hockey player, I’d rather go play in California too. I’d never want to deal with Toronto’s media.

    • atwatercrushesokoye - Mar 27, 2014 at 6:56 PM

      The taxes tend to even out when you look at the fact that Canadian players are earning 10% more due to being paid in American $ and then having it converted, plus the property taxes are higher in various parts of the States. I would be willing to guess that players in Calgary and Edmonton pay comparable taxes if not a little less than players in a lot of the US cities.

      As for overpaying, that’s a hockey thing not a Canadian team thing, when was the last time the Flyers, Rangers, Penguins etc got a bargain on a top free agent? It doesn’t happen!

      You’re right about the media attention though (especially in Montreal, at least Toronto and Vancouver’s media leaves their stories at the arena, they don’t follow players around) and also attention from fans, a good friend of mine lives in Winnipeg, his brother in law plays for a large market American team, in that market he can walk around no problem, they went out for dinner in Winnipeg, they talked in the car for a couple of minutes, by the time they got out there were 5 people looking for autographs. His brother in law is recognizable name but not a superstar. I can understand players being frustrated by that.

      You do miss several reasons players want to play in Canada, the fact most of them are from here, their families still live here, many of their wives are from here and their wives want to be closer to their families etc.

      After digesting your entire rant I would say you missed the biggest draw to the eastern seaboard American teams, the lack of travel. It’s possible for teams to go on a 5 game road trip and still sleep at home almost every night during it, that’s a big draw.

      • Lupy Nazty Philthy - Mar 28, 2014 at 5:44 PM

        “The taxes tend to even out ”
        No they don’t. The tax issue has been a problem for the Canadian teams for years. Happens less in Hockey because theres 7 teams, but for the Blue Jays and Raptors if hinders the teams chances of attracting anyone. Taxes aren’t the biggest issue plaguing Canadian teams though. Just one of the many straws on the camels back.

        I still blame the media the most… the fans are bad, but a lot of them just regurgitate the negativity the media feeds them. Rick Nash is probably the best example of players not wanting to deal with it. He grew up a Leafs fan, early in his career said he’d love to play for the Leafs… but when he was trade bait, Toronto (or any Canadian team for that matter) didn’t make his list of teams he’ll accept trades to.

        “As for overpaying, that’s a hockey thing not a Canadian team thing”
        One, I’m not saying some American teams don’t overpay. Obviously the Rangers and Flyers have a history of it… what I’m saying is ALL Canadian teams have to overpay just to get what’s left of the 2nd rate players.

        “when was the last time the Flyers, Rangers, Penguins etc got a bargain on a top free agent?”
        – Flyers getting Lecavalier for $4.5M which was a steal. He could made more money, played for his childhood favorite Habs, and been 1st liner… but he chose Philly for less.
        – Penguins routinely attract players just because the chance to win with Crosby and Malkin. Over the years, Gary Robert, Bill Guerin, Marian Hossa, Jerome Iginla have passed through town. Leafs have attracted guys like Mike Komisarek, Tim Connolly, Colby Armstrong, David Clarkson for roughly the same price.
        – Kane and Toews both make $6.3M/yr where as Kessel and Phaneuf make 8 and 7 respectively. I’d call that a steal for Chicago.

        “You’re right about the media attention though (especially in Montreal, at least Toronto and Vancouver’s media leaves their stories at the arena,”
        I wish that was true. Couple years ago Reimer got injured (Gionta hit his head), Toronto media went to Reimer’s mother’s house in Manitoba to get the scoop about his injury history. Was pretty pathetic.

        “You do miss several reasons players want to play in Canada”
        Yeah that’s why Dave Clarkson took the “home town discount” and forced the Leafs to cough up $5.2M/yr. Top players may ‘want’ to play for their Canadian favorites, but they don’t. Name the last time a top tier (all star caliber) UFA signed in Canada during his prime?

        “After digesting your entire rant I would say you missed the biggest draw to the eastern seaboard American teams, the lack of travel.”
        Not really a “rant” just calling it like I see it. Could be an issue, but Toronto, Ottawa and Montreal should benefit from the lack of travel being in the East too… but they don’t. Players just don’t want to deal with Canada.

        Still think the media is the biggest problem, but there’s so many little things that make Canada an even less desirable place to play. It’s no wonder ALL the teams are struggling and why no Canadian team has won in 20+ years.

    • atwatercrushesokoye - Mar 28, 2014 at 6:20 PM

      I tend to respectfully disagree with you on a couple of points. I believe you’re a Leafs fan, so I understand your frustration at the current situation. Dealing with strictly Toronto the taxes would be higher yes, In Alberta we have lower taxes, throw in the 10% bump in salary built into playing in Canada and we’d be comparable to most American cities.

      In Toronto there is an insane pressure to win, which will probably let up considerably when they finally do, just look at how fondly the 93 team is looked upon and they didn’t make it to the final. But with certain hometown players (Rick Nash) I could see that pressure being too much and driving him away, not sure he’s a player I’d want for that situation anyways, Toronto needs the player who embraces the pressure and takes it on, the guy (superstar, captain, everyone) who is a part of the team that eventually wins a cup there will be a city legend.

      Kane and Towes aren’t great examples, those guys are young, both are on their second contracts (I believe) they’re about to get significant increases in pay.

      Malkin and Crosby went to Pittsburgh as free agents and are two of the highest paid players in the league. The 4 other Penguins (at one time) you mentioned, at least two of them went their by trade, not as free agents, and I think all 4 may have been trades. Iginla went there strictly to win a cup, winning is the biggest draw any team can have.

      Lecavalier isn’t in his prime anymore, I would say $4.5 million is a good contract for him, I’ll give Philly a got him at market value for that one.

      Last all star UFA to sign in Canada…first off have any all star UFA’s been difference makers anywhere? Generally they’re going for a pay day and they end up going to teams who can afford them, classic example Suter and Parise chose Minnesota over Detroit and Pittsburgh (I think) respectively. Not to say they’re not good players in Minnesota, they are, but all star UFA’s in their prime very rarely tend to end up in places where they’re the one missing piece from a Stanley Cup.

      I’m sure there’s others but since I’m running out of free time I’ll rattle off Bouwmeester signing in Calgary and Hamhuis signing in Vancouver.

      • Lupy Nazty Philthy - Mar 28, 2014 at 6:50 PM

        “Malkin and Crosby went to Pittsburgh as free agents ”
        They were both drafted. They re-signed as RFAs not UFAs, big difference… plus both signed during the season, before actually becoming free agents.

        “first off have any all star UFA’s been difference makers anywhere?”
        Takes a team, not a single player, but UFA signing can definitely make the the difference. Scott Neidermeyer signing helped Anaheim win their cup. Sergei Gonchar signing in Pittsburgh helped them win their last one. Boston doesn’t win their without Tim Thomas. I’m sure the Hossa signing helped in Chicago’s cup wins.

        ” I’ll rattle off Bouwmeester signing in Calgary and Hamhuis signing in Vancouver.”
        Hamhuis might be the only one exception in the last decade… but ONE guy doesn’t really mean tons of top talent are flooding into Canada. Plus, it’s just Hamhuis. reliable defensively, but not exactly an elite talent. As for Jay Bo, Calgary traded to get his negotiating rights and signed him before he his the free market.

  18. muckleflugga - Mar 27, 2014 at 7:00 PM


    great eye … nice rack … you truly are a connoisseur … i humbly submit it is a great rack … and i keep abreast of matters nipple

    the fool needs to be clued-in … if he’s waiting until leafs win a cup she’ll be gone gone gone gone gone so long she’ll be gone gone gone so long and

    someone else will be enjoying the pleasure of helping her out of the offending rag … burying his head in her opening and revealing voluptuous … sliding wanting fingers through steaming rivulets of desire … up her yearning thighs … hearts throbbing … wanting … needing

    to hell with the leafs

    will this washer do … let’s get hitched

  19. canadianguest - Mar 27, 2014 at 9:15 PM

    So what many are saying is, Canadian teams were winning when they had mostly Canadian players?

Top 10 NHL Player Searches
  1. P. Kessel (1874)
  2. P. Kane (1659)
  3. P. Datsyuk (1362)
  4. M. Richards (1361)
  5. N. Backstrom (1220)