Broadway bust

Just when you think Valeri Kamensky can't prove to be any more of a blunder, the Stars send him to the minors and then ship him to New Jersey. The Devils are clearly desperate. Actually, it's not a terrible move by New Jersey because the club didn't give up anything significant to acquire a player who does have talent, even if he puts it to use only sparingly. Maybe the Devils get a good half season and 12-15 goals out of him. I can't imagine any bigger upside than that. Kamensky was the worst and most shortsighted free-agent signing of all time when then-Rangers GM Neil Smith handed him $6 million per season a few years back. Then Dallas overpaid him last offseason. I cannot think of player whose gotten richer for less.

And now, on to your mailbag ...

How much longer can the Rangers go with Ron Low and that coaching staff? At this point they have to be one of the worst teams in the league. They have no passion and on top of that have no idea how to play defense. They are absolutely horrible.
—Raymond Asfar, Johnstown, Pa.

How do you really feel, Raymond? I'm not a huge fan of Ron Low's X's and 0's but I absolutely disagree that the Rangers play without passion. The one thing they've brought in this season -- through all their offensive highs and defensive lows -- is a willingness to play hard. They're much more determined than they were last year. They just aren't very good.

The Rangers lousiness can be attributed most of all to their ineffective defense, which much of the nation saw during last Saturday's 4-2 loss to the Flyers. Their total defensive breakdown on the winning goal in that game is something New York fans have grown accustomed to all season. Low's no guru on the chalkboard, but when I look at the roster he's dealing with -- which includes a defensive corps that couldn't scare a Blue Jacket -- I sympathize with him. Low might get axed as soon as his team falls out of playoff position, but it's hard to blame him for the Rangers being where they are; that's the roster's fault.

Should the U.S. and Canadian Olympic teams have selected some players that are playing on the larger ice surfaces in Europe right now rather a roster consisting entirely of NHL players who might struggle in adjusting to the larger surface? I think a European team that has a blend of NHL and European-based players will win the gold -- as the Czechs did at the last Olympics. What are your thoughts?
—Richard Bateman, Westport, Conn.

A European team that takes players from the European leagues makes sense because there are a percentage of excellent players who choose to stay in their home countries rather than coming to the NHL to get rich. It wouldn't make sense for the U.S. or Canada to go over there for even one of their players, however. Those North Americans are all players who can't make the NHL -- and most can't make the IHL either. So, while they may be used to the larger ice surface, the dropoff in talent is too great to warrant a selection. If you, or anyone else out there, has a deserving player in mind, by all means write back and we'll discuss. I can't think of anyone over there who was passed over.

I just read your response to the oft asked question "Why didn't Canada select Bowman to coach in the Olympics?" You noted two things of interest. One, he has taken U.S. citizenship and, two, he could coach any team. This begs the question: Why did the U.S. overlook him for the job?
—Frank Pinkney, Ottawa

The U.S. has an excellent coach in Herb Brooks. Because this is the first Winter Olympics on U.S. soil since 1980 -- when Brooks coached U.S. to that enduring miracle -- USA Hockey officials wanted to capitalize and hearken back to that golden time. You'll see a lot of footage of a young Herb behind that '80 bench as the '02 Games unfold.

From a pure hockey perspective, Brooks is a strong choice as well. He favors a wide-open style that's much less meticulously designed (that is, Brooks' system is easier to learn on short notice than Bowman's). Also, because Brooks doesn't currently have the pressures of being a full-time coach weighing on him (as Bowman does), he was able to dedicate a lot of attention to helping select the team. He also has time to plot strategy. It's a shame Bowman's not going to be in Salt Lake, but it isn't the U.S. team's loss.

Hey Kostya. Living in Detroit, I watch all of the Wings games. It has become apparent to me and most of the hockey world that the Red Wings need a gritty defender. Previous reports have said that Detroit might get Darius Kasparaitis, but it seems that the Islanders are going to get him now. With that said, who can the Wings get and for whom? I have heard that Pavel Datsyuk is trade bait. What do you think about that?
—Rich, Detroit

The Wings' need for a gritty defenseman is no more pronounced than many teams. Overall, they're in pretty good shape. Everybody, even the top contenders, could use another force on the blue line. Lyle Odelein and Kasparaitis are prime candidates for a trade somewhere. As an aside, remember that in Chris Chelios Detroit has one of the great physical, ornery defenseman in the game -- even at 39. Of the many players that Bowman has to pace down the stretch, none is more important than Chelios. The Wings need him to be rested come playoff time and ready to play a lot of nasty minutes. They'll also count on the continued maturation of that big boy Jiri Fischer.

So a trade is by no means inevitable. Yet Ken Holland almost always makes some kind of deadline deal and he could make a minor one here. I wouldn't be shocked to see Detroit acquire Ken Daneyko to play some key playoff minutes for them. Daneyko doesn't have much speed but he knows how to win in big spots and he'll clear the puck for you in sticky times. The Devils would want high draft picks in return. When a team is playing for the now -- as the Red Wings are, and should be -- anyone can get traded. But Holland will be wary about surrendering the impish Datsyuk. He's a young center on a team that needs to begin nurturing youth at that position. Depending on the size of the deal -- if there is one -- Boyd Devereaux or Kirk Maltby could be dealt.

Has it ever been discussed to differentiate 5-on-3 power plays from the 5-on-4s in the statistics? It seems a bit misleading to lump them into the same stat, considering that defending the 5-on-3 is a lot more difficult.
—Adrienne, San Diego, Calif.

Yeah, it's a little misleading, but we'll live with it. Teams and the NHL do keep 5-on-3 efficiency, and though that's not part of the regular stat package, you can get those numbers with a little digging. Because two-men up situations are relatively rare, and because even impotent teams are so effective when they're at 5-on-3, the numbers rarely add much, except maybe a little confusion. Occasionally, if a team is absolutely unstoppable at 5-on-3 or conversely, absolutely inept, a figure to illustrate that will come out. Otherwise, it's fine to keep it in the general power play mix.

Should the NHL reevaluate how it awards goals? The other night Steve Yzerman banked a shot off Brendan Shanahan's butt, and into the net. Should it be Shanny's goal?
—Chris Boyd, Las Vegas

Yes, it should be Shanny's goal. Hockey goals come fast and furious and the only possible way to have consistency in awarding goals is to give it to the last player on the scoring team who touched the puck. Yzerman may have made that shot, but there's no way to say it would have gone in if it hadn't bonked off Brendan's behind.

Sports Illustrated senior writer Kostya Kennedy covers the NHL for the magazine and is a regular contributor to CNNSI.com. To send a question to his Mailbag, click here.

 

Related information
Multimedia
Visit Video Plus for the latest audio and video
Search our site	Watch CNN/SI 24 hours a day
	Sports Illustrated and CNN have combined to form a 24 hour sports news and information channel. To receive CNN/SI at your home call your cable operator or DirecTV.