The plight of Daniel Alfredsson

As a life-long Toronto Maple Leafs fan, it's not very often that I write about the Ottawa Senators in a positive voice. Or even a neutral one for that matter.

Yet I am struck by an interesting peculiarity. The NHL trade deadline is set for February 28 at 3:00 p.m. eastern, and the Ottawa Senators are faced with a dilemma that us Leaf fans know all-too-well.

To trade or not to trade?

Of course that question can refer to any number of Senators currently on the underachieving team roster. Mike Fisher? Free agent bust Sergei Gonchar? Even bigger bust Alexie Kovalev? Defensive mainstay Chris Philips?

But my focus right now is on the team's captain, and the face of the franchise for the past decade - Daniel Alfredsson.

No doubt the Senators GM Bryan Murray will field calls for his captain - only a fool wouldn't - but the question is a difficult one both for Murray and Alfie. No trade clause aside, do the Sens try to move their franchise-leader in nearly every offensive category, signalling to fans and season ticket holders that they are moving towards a rebuild from the ground up?

With a record of 17-27-8, the Sens are last in their division (yes, even worse than the Leafs) and have the fourth-worst record in the league.

And with 30 points on the season along with a dreadful -16 rating - the second-worse rating of his career, topped only by his -18 rookie season - Alfie is having a less-than-stellar year.

Nevertheless, he could provide valuable leadership and secondary scoring to a contending team.

The dilemma is one familiar to Leaf fans, who endured a similar situation back in 2008 with Mats Sundin. Sundin had been unwilling to waive his no trade clause prior to the deadline, which meant the Leafs could not move him for picks or prospects to a contender..

In a story we all know too-well, Sundin became a free agent and chose not to re-sign in T.O., instead waiting half a season before signing a contract with the Vancouver Canucks. He recorded 28 points in 41 games with Canucks, then added eight more in eight playoff games that spring, before skating off into the sunset and announcing his retirement.

An inglorious end to one of Toronto's greatest athletes.

And now Alfredsson is faced with the same dilemma. Certainly there is no hope of the 38-year-old becoming a long-term piece of what could likely become a long-term rebuild in the nation's capital, yet does he put pride aside and end up becoming only one of only three other players to have played their entire career with one franchise and never hoist the Stanley Cup? (Of players with a minimum 1,000 games played, the others are Gilbert Perreault, Dave Taylor and Craig Ramsay.)

The similarities are striking; both Sundin and Alfredsson have been consistent forwards in the NHL. Both have scored more than 100 points just once in their careers (Sundin, 1992-93 and Alfredsson, 2005-06) yet still maintain nearly a point-per-game average. And both led their respective teams to playoff success in their careers, but never hoisted the cup.

In one final twist, however, while Sundin never publicly complained about who he was paired with on the ice Toronto fans incessantly complained that management was never willing to provide Sundin with a reputable winger (minus Alexander Mogilny for two-and-a-half seasons), instead forced to help raise the games of no-namers like Jonas Hoglund or Dmitri Khristich, while Alfredsson spent several seasons on a line with one of the games best wingers (Heatley) and better offensive centreman (Spezza).

Chances are that Alfredsson will not ask to be traded because of his loyalty to the franchise, much like Sundin, and is saying all the right things by insisting he wants to help with a rebuild.

Regardless, it must be painful for Alfredsson who has watched the once formidable Senators franchise fall so far so fast, and to know that his time is running out. He has two years remaining on his contract, but the odds are pretty good that the Sens are more than two seasons away from competing for the Cup once again.

And that's where the differences end. Unline the Leafs when they were faced with this situation, the Senators have something the Buds did not - time. They have a few seasons before Alfredsson absolutely needs to make his decision.

Of course, at 38 years old, Alfredsson's skills have begun to recede and if they want to get the best return on the investment they made 17 years ago when the drafted Alfredsson 133rd overall, it might be in their best interest to move him sooner rather than later.

Top-Ten Overplayed Songs of the Summer

As yet another summer season draws to a close, and the inevitability of eight months of cold and darkness descends upon us, I thought I would celebrate the end of the season by recounting my top-ten overplayed songs of the summer.

In my search for employment from May to August, I did a lot of driving and put a lot of kilometers on my poor car (for the record I'm up of 309,000 now).

As a result, I spent a lot of time listening to the radio. 

Now, a lot of the time I prefer the mental exercise provided by CBC Radio 1, but sometimes even an intellectual like me likes to do a little boogie behind the wheel while sitting in traffic on the 401. 

And I've found that radio stations tend to do the same thing we ALL do - find a song with a catchy tune, and play it over and over and over again, until the song over-saturates the airwaves so much that we're afraid to turn the radio on in case we hear that song again.

The majority of the songs on this list were actually songs that I liked at first - that is, until the local radio stations decided to play the ever-living soul out of them.

So without further ado, here is my top-ten list of overplayed songs of summer 2010.

10) Hey, Soul Sister (Train) - If I have to hear Patrick Monahan (the lead vocalist) sing about his "untrimmed chest" one more time I'm going to scream. Oh, and their awful rendition at the MLB All-Star Game didn't help either...

9) Break Your Heart (Taio Cruz) - The song itself is ok, but how many times does Ludicrous have to remind us of who he is? Is he that afraid of becoming irrelevant...? Too late.

8) Not Afraid (Eminem) - At least he admits that his last album sucked. Now, if only we could get him to admit that all the other one's were terrible too, we'd have something...  and half the song is censored on the radio, too. Pull your WHAT from the dirt and do WHAT to the whole universe?!?

7) Airplanes (B.o.B. feat. Hayley Williams) - Really? Famous rappers still rapping about the days before they became were famous rappers and had millions of dollars...? Real original.

6) Your Love is My Drug (Ke$ha) - And judging by the creativity of the lyrics, that drug is crack.

5) Anything by Lady Gaga

4) O.M.G. (Usher) - Oh.My.God.

3) Billionaire (Travie McCoy Feat. Bruno Mars) - Unlike what this song suggests, money CAN'T buy you everything. Weren't you listening to Airplanes by B.o.B.??

Although I must admit, the line "I'd probably pull an Angelina and Brad Pitt, and adopt a bunch of babies that ain't never had shit" sets a new standard for... well... idiocy. 

2) Best I Ever Had (Drake) - Sorry, but the track is so heavily synthesized that he sounds like Marvin the Paranoid Android. 

1) California Gurls (Katy Perry Feat. Snoop Dogg) - Just because it annoys the hell out of me. 

The MMA - New Respect from a Non-Believer

I'll be the first to admit it - until today I lacked a certain respect for Mixed Martial Arts.

Since it first hit the mainstream a few years ago, I always thought the MMA was just a couple of meat-head goons facing off in the ring, bashing, crashing, and gnashing their opponents into a bloody pulp. That's what it looks like on television anyways...

I had no idea what a "Neck Crank" or the "Triangle Hold" was. For me, a keylock was something I used to lock my door, and the terrifying "Flying Scissor Heel Hook" had never entered my vocabulary. 

For me it was a lot of elbows to the head, knees to the ribs, and kicks to the head. And certainly not a sport.

But today I had a change of heart. I'd say that I was singing a different tune if I had the energy - or the breath - to even attempt a whistle.

I attended my first kick-boxing fitness class with my girlfriend, and to say that it was the longest and most intense hour of my life would be an understatement. At one point I glanced at the clock in the corner of the room and was shocked to see that eight minutes of the 55-minute class had passed.

I still have no idea what the "Triangle Hold" or the "Neck Crank" are (I just did a web search for "MMA moves") but I now realize how tough the sport is, and how athletic the men who do it really are.

Basically, the kick-boxing class is an hour of intense full-body workout that includes fun things like kicking and punching a six-foot punching bag, and also a heavy dose of cardio training and abdominal workouts.

Not so fun.

We learned the basics of kick-boxing, including punches like the uppercut, hook, and jab, to go along with a couple of kicks. It looked super easy on the gym's website, and I was pretty sure the class was going to be a walk in the park.

I've played a lot of sports in my life - rugby, football, soccer, baseball, and volleyball just to name a few - but I have never experienced anything like this before in my life. Punching that bag is surprisingly tiring.

Naysayers of MMA who claim it's not a sport, including high-profile sporting companies like EA Sports - the same guys and gals who make the Madden NFL games and the immensely popular NHL games - have stated that the MMA, "isn't a real sport."

To that I say they've probably never stepped into the ring before, because if they had they would know right away that MMA athletes are among the most physically fit *ahem baseball* in the entire world, and the probably the most determined and fearless.

What I mean by that is as a fighter, you know the blood and teeth are going to be flying soon after the fight begins. You know eventually you're going to end up on the ground with a 200-lb guy on top of you trying to hit you wherever he can with an elbow or a punch. You know you're probably going to end up face-first into the chain-link fence. It's just a matter of surviving the three five-minute rounds.

Now, don't expect me to be lining up for UFC 1,00,000 or whatever the next one is - I still don't find it entertaining to watch grown men throw elbows to each others skulls - but I do have a new respect for the sport, and its athletes.

And yes, they definitely are athletes.

The Census Debate

You remember this debate, right? The one where the Tories want to scrap the long-form census because they feel the questions are too "invasive" for Canadians. I for one would like to know where Harper and his Conservative cronies worked up this idea.

Things have been, well, not good for Harper the past few months. Between the end of June and the middle of August, the Liberals saw an eight-point growth in support, while the Conservatives saw their support fall by about three-and-a-half points. Harpers government has largely been on the defensive ever since the prorogation of parliament seven months ago.

But enough numbers talk.

Heading into this summer, the Conservatives knew they had a fight on their hands to maintain their popularity as we head into the Fall - and perhaps another Federal election.

So (and this is my own theorizing here) they cooked up a scheme where they could look like the good guys for once by eliminating that dasterdly mandatory long-form census.

There, problem solved.

But... wait... what problem? I could be mistaken here, but I don't seem to remember the phone lines of call-in radio shows and noon-hour tv talk shows burning up with concerned citizens voicing their concern, anger and fear over the mandatory long-form census.

It was a non-issue; that is, until Harper made it one. Maybe he had hopes of sliding it under the Canadian public's noses. Maybe he secretly hoped Canadian's would collectively rejoice Harper for freeing us from the shackles of the dasterdly long-form census.

No longer would he have to inform the government that our porch needed painting, or how much money we brought home from work each week.

Of course, the majority of my friends have much more revealing information on their Facebook pages than are on the long-form census questionnaire, but I digress...

The bottom line is this: the census is critical for the functioning of our government, our public services, and in fact our democracy. As a historian I have made countless usage of census data, both historical and modern. Government agencies across the country - in fact, the world - have railed on Harper and his government decision to scrap the long-form census, saying it would undermine critical services to Canadians, including health care.

The government cites the money that can be saved by scrapping the long-form census; but what about the millions that will need to be spent on private firms gathering the information instead when the government actually needs the information? And how are municipalities - already with tightening purse-strings - supposed to afford to conduct these surveys once the costs are inevitibly downloaded to them?

In a commentary piece released to the Globe & Mail on July 17 of this year, the Fraser Institute - one of Canada's leading intellectual think-tanks on economics and policy - proclaimed "Census too intrusive" (that was the title)

The authors went on to write that Canadian's should be "wise to challenge the prevailing wisdom of this vested interest group." That group of course being academics, economists, and other social scientists.

"Since these are heavy users of long-form data, their widespread opposition to the government's decision is not surprising."

So I got to thinking, "hmmm isn't the Fraser Institute an academic think tank which specializes in economics and government policy?"

I went through some of their online database, and found an interesting file called, "Is Toronto in decline? Worrying trends from the Census."

Now, I picked this file for obvious reasons - the title. Four of the ten sources cited in the article from June, 2008 are Statistics Canada. And what government agency relies more on the census than any other agency in the country? Statistics Canada. I think you may recall when the head of StatsCan, Munir Sheikh, stepped down from his position because of the government decision to scrap the census.

I also did a quick search of the word "census" in the document - 33 results in 12 pages. Whether or not that information came specifically from the long or short census isn't really the issue here. Their use of, ahem, their reliance on the census itself is.

It seems hypocritical for such a large agency to deride the census in one way, yet rely so heavily on it for their reports.

Anyone agree with me?

Can I take a poll?

What do wild blackberry bushes and sustainability have in common?

Yesterday my girlfriend and I were on a 5 km jog along the trail between the two towns of Fergus and Elora, Ontario.

We had reached the mid-way point of our run and decided to take a little break from the heat and the humidity; it was only about 8:30 in the morning, but the heat was already oppressive.

After a brief rest and some stretching we were about to get back to our run, when I spotted a wild blackberry bush growing near the trail. The bushes were fairly well concealed and it was clear that not even the birds had spotted the berries, because among the red and pink not-quite-ripe berries were about a dozen perfectly ripe ones.

I called my girlfriend over and we started eating the delicious berries one or two at a time, until there were only about five or six left, along with the 15 or 20 unripe berries.

I paused for a moment and reconsidered our luck; we were about to eat every last berry and leave nothing for anyone else who may find them, and it would be a couple of days before the younger berries would be ripe enough to eat. We weren't hungry and we didn't rely on those berries for survival, and yet here we were about to strip this berry tree bare just because we could. It seemed wasteful and greedy for some reason.

We ended up leaving those five or six berries on the tree, perfectly ripe and begging to be picked, for the next passerby who just happened to stumble upon the berries as we had. Rather than eating them all just because we could, we simply took the time to enjoy the few we had eaten, and left the rest for others.

It made me think how much better off everyone in this world might be if we truly considered our needs over our wants, and made more of our decisions based on the former rather than the latter.

Maybe there would be a little more of everything to go around for everyone.