The Athletic Hockey Show - 5 members of Canada’s 2018 WJC team to surrender to police on sexual assault charges

Episode Date: January 24, 2024

Ian Mendes and Julian McKenzie welcome Katie Strang, the Athletic investigative reporter to discuss the investigation into the sexual assault claim from June of 2018, involving members of the 2018 Canadian junior hockey team and the fact that five unnamed players have finally been asked to surrender to London Ontario police.Ian and Julian debate the timing of the news that Ryan Smith, the owner of the NBA's ​​Utah Jazz has formally asked the NHL to initiate the expansion process and bring a team to Salt Lake City, and if the NHL really needs to expand so soon again.Plus, Fluto Shinzawa joins from Boston to talk about the Bruins, who despite limitations on their roster, and the loss of star players, continue to excel, and the guys stick-tap the Edmonton Oilers who extend their winning streak to 14 games. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

This is the Athletic Hockey Show. Welcome everybody to your Wednesday edition of the Athletic Hockey Show. It is Ian Mendez. It is Julian McKenzie. And we are with you here on a really, I think, interesting day in the hockey world, Julian. Where Katie Strang is going to join us here, you know, momentarily to talk about what has been a, you know, a day filled with, I think a lot of speculation and we want to steer away from, you know, kind of speculation, stick to facts.

But boy, oh boy, as it pertains to hockey Canada in 2018, I don't know that there's a more important story, right? Is that fair to say in the hockey world today as you either wake up or you, you know, listen to our podcast on a Wednesday? There's nothing more important than this story involving the 2018 world junior hockey team, is there? Yeah, it's a story that the hockey world collectively, has been waiting on the next chapter for months, it feels like.

Well, pretty much since the lawsuit was filed and everything after that, we have noticed the changes, the seismic changes to hockey Canada. And there has been speculation on who has been involved. And it's just, it's wrapped everyone up. So, of course, it's the biggest story to talk about. And considering some of the details that we'll get into with Katie Strang, when we have her on. This is a story that's going to be talked about for a couple days. This isn't just, this isn't going to be a story that, you know, today being a Wednesday,

we're going to focus on it and then Thursday we'll forget. A lot of people are going to be hanging on this for for quite some time. They're going to be looking at so many different possible connections. And I know we're not going to get into it, but this is going to be a story that we're going to be tackling for quite some time. And I think we're all just kind of bracing for the further ramifications from this. Yeah. And just to give the listeners a little bit of context of what the story is we're talking about on this Wednesday, and that is Robin Doolittle, who, if you're in the United States, the name Robin Doolittle may not resonate with you. Robin Doolittle is a Globe and Mail reporter in Canada.

A news, like kind of does not really do too much in the sports realm. Most of Robin's expertise is in other areas, but this is right up her lane. She is one of the premier investigative reporters in this country. she is a champion for freedom of information very much like Katie Strang is in America and Katie obviously her work comes into Canada too but Robin is in Canada one of the preeminent investigative reporters in our country and in the Globe and Mail

on Wednesday Robin reports that five members of that 2018 World Junior Hockey team have been told you need to come to London and talk to the police. And what's clear is that nobody's been charged yet. Nothing has accelerated there. But the fact of the matter is Robin Doolittle reports, five players from that team have been told the report.

It makes you feel like, you know, you're waiting for the other shoe to drop. The inevitable charges are laid. And then once charges are laid, that is the case. Well, I think we do have Katie Stray ready to go. In fact, she's in the chat. So I know for sure. Katie Strang is on board. And we welcome her into this Wednesday edition of the Athletic Hockey Show.

And Katie, you know, you have followed this story from the get-go back in all. And it feels like I can't believe how long it's been, but we're talking about about three years here, right? Or two, whatever it is, two years, May of 2022, right? That this all, boy, now my time is. No, you're absolutely right, yes. Yeah. Julian has been handling the timeline.

That's right. Yeah, that's right. Julia's been handled. Yeah, that's when Rick West had first reported the court case. So that's when it sort of became a part of the public consciousness. Yes. Yeah. And, you know, for us, and we said, right, Julie and I said right off the top,

in these types of situations, the key is now to stick to facts and not to try to get speculative or to try to think about who, you know, there's no names of all. So maybe if you could just maybe share with our listeners here, Katie, and our viewers, like as we sit here and have this conversation at 2 o'clock Eastern time on Wednesday, what do we know? So we know from Robin Doolittle of the Toronto Globe and Mail's report. And I think you guys probably already covered this in the show. She's a terrific reporter who's uncovered a great deal of huge, important, sensitive stories. she's done incredible work on sexual assault in the way that that is, you know, investigated and prosecuted in Canada.

So no surprise that she has been terrific on this subject as well. So she reported earlier today that there are five members of the World Junior hockey team from that 2018 hockey Canada team that have been asked to surrender. to the London police to face sexual assault charges. That they've been given a certain time period to report. We don't know what that time period is. So that's what we know from her report. We know that the London Police Service, you know, I have contacted them. They said that they are unable to comment at this time,

but that, you know, when there's anything concrete that has come to fruition as a result of their investigation, if it does, they will make some sort of statement. We've reached out to the league. The league says that there's nothing that they can say at this time. The PA is also not commenting. And then we know, you know, that there are a handful of players who have taken leaves of absences from their teams. I want to be really careful here because I think given the fact that these are very serious allegations, very serious subject matter, you know, I think it's really incumbent upon us to act with the most, you know, extreme sense of responsibility and judiciousness in the way that we report these matters. So there are dots. I think that people are trying to connect, but I, you know, I don't think we have the full picture yet. Okay. One question I have is this is a story that a lot of people in the hockey world have been waiting on. And we thought, I know for myself, I thought maybe this was something that was going to pop up last summer.

Maybe this was something that was going to eventually drop before training camp. We're in January of 2024. Why has this taken as much time as it has before we've reached this point where we, we, we, we know five players are going to have to surrender themselves to police. Like, why has this taken the time that it's taken? Okay, so you have to remember that there's three sort of like parallel and potentially overlapping investigations. Four, if you consider, you know, the parliamentary, you know, Heritage Committee investigation

too. But there's a, you know, primarily there's the Hockey Canada investigation. There's the NHL investigation. and then there is the London police investigation. Now, because the London police are investigating this as a criminal matter, it's fair to view that as the superseding investigation, the sort of central investigation that essentially trumps all others, right? So when you frame it in that context,

then I think it's helpful to understand that the London police are not going to be governed or dictated by an NHL. schedule. They don't give a shit when the All-Star break is. They do not under, like, they are not going to make moves based on when opening night is or when there is a long West Coast road trip. Okay. So I think that's why you are seeing this take this long. And the fact of the matter is there's so much that we don't know about like all of the nuances and subtext of this investigation. We have no idea what sort of, you know, actually we do have some idea of, you know, search warrants and stuff, but, you know, forensic analysis can take a super long time in terms of, you know, if they have to go through

phones, if they have to go through messages, if they have to analyze metadata. And also remember that there's, you know, the initial allegation was that there were eight members of that team involved in some capacity with this alleged assault. Sort of the more recent development, from the London police where that they felt like they had enough evidence to potentially charge five members in that alleged assault. So those are five to eight different individuals

who have potentially like similar overlapping, you know, levels of potential legal exposure in some ways aligned interests and sometimes competing interests. So, you know, I'm taking a very circuitous path to say that there's a lot of, lot of different competing interests at play. And to be able to do, I think, a very thorough, robust, nuanced investigation and to do it

right, it takes time. Like that, that type of stuff doesn't happen overnight. Yeah. And I think to further that point, Katie, it's important to the listeners know that initially the London Police Department did not lay charges, right? Did not lay criminal charges when they did their original investigation. But the fact that they reopened it now, I think, and because this is such a public a case with such public interest in Canada, they have to get this right, right?

Like, Katie, like they have to, there is a tremendous amount of scrutiny and there will be from, you know, reporters like us, Rick Westhead, Robin Doolittle, there's going to be people pressing for freedom of information. How did this, you know, how did you come to these conclusions? So they have to make sure that they get this right. Isn't that part of this? Of course. Yeah, I mean, I think we are going to want to be extremely diligent leave no stone unturned. You know, at the time that there was an application with the court, when they, you know, sort of made that position known to the court

that they felt like they had sufficient evidence to move forward with a case against five of those individuals. They also indicated in that warrant packet that they were still trying to track down certain individuals that they felt might have meaningful information about this case. I seem to remember that one of them was a taxi driver or an Uber driver that might have given the woman a ride home that night. So, I mean, you know, chasing down some of those, you know, loose ends can take a really long time.

You know, if you're doing trauma-informed investigation, you also want to be extremely sensitive to the fact that this is really difficult subject matter and you know trauma can have a very physiological impact on the brain and and it's not always easy for people who have been um you know involved in traumatic crimes to be able to remember things easily or in necessarily a linear fashion and so you know there there are a bunch of different reasons that this is probably taken a lot of time. And the reality, the practical reality is, like, we can't possibly know at this point, you know, what that investigation has looked like, what the contours of that probe have been, what hurdles, you know, institutionally they might have faced, you know, whether

there are people there still trying to get in touch with. And, you know, what sort of back and forth there might be with, you know, the counsel for the players involved. Do you think it gets to a point where the five names, they are formally revealed? We know it's just five and there are people trying to make connections. But do you think it, does it ever get to a point where we as the public get to actually know the five people? Yes, but let me offer a caveat to that, which is like I'm saying this as an American. So if this were happening in the U.S. legal system, I feel pretty confident of that. I don't know the intricacies of Canadian law enough to know like the boundaries of publication bans and privacy protections in the Canadian court system and how those might intersect with this particular case.

But my understanding is, you know, if these five individuals are going to be charged, and I think that's, you know, again, based on Robin's. body of work. I have no reason to doubt that she's not going to report that unless that is imminent. Those charges, you know, will be, you know, filed with the court. They will be a matter of public record to some degree. What I'm just unsure of is whether us as the media will be bound in any way because of any potential publication bans. You know, and just to follow up on that. So I had a great conversation today, Katie and Julian, with a woman named Ava Williams. She's a lawyer in the London area.

And actually when Ava Williams was a teenager at going to university in London, she actually sued the London Police Department because she was the victim of a sexual assault. And she felt like the London Police Department essentially bungled her case. And she has made it her life's work to focus on this. And had a conversation with her today about kind of what we can expect. So to your point, Katie, and I'm just looking at my notes from my conversation with her, she said that there might be a publication ban here, given the nature of the complaint, but she believes because the person, EM, I think was the initials, right, of the victim,

because she was an adult at the time, she believes that this could very well be open to the media to come and observe, observe and report. And the other thing that I thought was interesting that she told me is that in all likelihood, if there are five people charged, they would likely kind of be tried together, so to speak, so that the victim wouldn't have to go to five separate court cases and re-traumatize themselves on five different occasions. So that's kind of what I was able to glean from a conversation with Ava Williams.

But you're right, like there's so many nuances here with Canadian law and Ontario law that I think make this a really, interesting, delicate situation, right? And we just have to handle it with so much care. And I want our listeners and people who know, who follow us at the athletic, to know that we're handling this with the utmost care, right?

Like, we're paying attention to this story. We're not avoiding it. We're not tiptoeing around it because we're doing this because this is, as Katie knows, you've done so much reporting in this space. There's a degree of caution that has to be exercised that I don't know that everybody quite understands, right? Yeah, I mean, I encounter that a lot in my reporting that I think when people know you're working on a story and you haven't reported it yet, like I think it's natural for people maybe outside of the business to think that, you know, you're not reporting it for reasons A, B, and C. And it's often, I mean, like the simple solution is stories that require a great deal of investigative work take a lot of time, a lot of resources, and a

tremendous amount of care and caution. You don't want to ever get that wrong. You don't want to ever report anything, you know, when you don't feel extremely confident that your information is going to be unimpeachable and beyond reproach because, you know, there are very serious implications for all of the individuals involved that you're reporting on. And it's really doing a disservice to the subject matter if you're not treating it with the appropriate amount of gravity indulgence. So, you know, to anyone like frustrated about the dearth of information, you know, information, we are too. We get that. We understand that we're journalists. We're doing our best to both, you know, balance the need for information with being able to provide it to the readers

in a way that's fully vetted, informed, responsible, and, you know, carefully reported. I'm curious. I know you being in the United States, perhaps the story doesn't have that same amount of resonance in the media cycle compared to other stories. But in Canada, obviously, when the lawsuit went out and any other development that comes up, it ends up being a massive, big deal in Canada. And we've seen the government MPs speak of their piece on it. We've seen the stories of sponsors pulling out from Hockey Canada. There have been seismic changes at Hockey Canada, change of leadership.

And now we've reached this point. I'm just curious from how you see things. And obviously you reporting on the story doing a great job on it. But seeing how much people in the hockey world have wrapped themselves in this story and how this is turned into a grander discussion about hockey culture and how people should conduct themselves. What are your impressions of how big of a story this has become, thanks to your reporting, thanks to Rick Westhead's reporting, thanks to Robin Doolittle's reporting. You know, it's hard for me to probably be able to answer that question as well as, you know, you guys can as Canadians because I'm not sort of immersed in the every day of it. I mean, you know, it's a, it's a known story here.

It's not as seismic as it is in Canada where it's obviously, you know, dominating headlines in front page news whenever there are significant developments. But as it relates to its impact on the hockey world, I mean, I would say it's extremely significant for all the reasons that you listed, which is, you know, it encapsulates, I think, some broader questions about hockey culture. culture and about institutions and how we treat certain subjects and, you know, how we discuss certain things. And, you know, it's timely, it's topical. And I think part of it is it's, you know, it is persisted for so long. It has prompted parliamentary hearings. It has prompted, you know,

certain entities to reopen investigation, that's really rare. So I think you're seeing all of these unprecedented things happen in response. And I think that really underscores its significance and importance in the broader, you know, consciousness of the news cycle. Before we let you go, I want to ask you one question, Katie. And it's more of a industry question because it's something that I've gotten a lot lately and I know you tweeted out the story today that you, Dan Robson and I worked on, you know, back in 2022.

And people are angry that these types of stories are behind a paywall. And I want to just give you an opportunity to just very rationally explain to people because what happens on social media is you try to get into a conversation with somebody about a paywall and it never quite goes and you don't quite maybe have the runway that you need. And I think so much of your work has been so important and it's behind a paywall, but it's for a reason why it's behind a paywall. And I just, I want to give you an opportunity to answer that because again today, it happened where you put that out and I looked at the mentions made a mistake and all these people

are saying lift the paywall. Why is this behind a paywall? Yeah, and I certainly understand like the public interest in this. And I think there are scenarios in which, you know, we do decide to put things out of the pay well, as you and I both know, Julian 2, like those decisions are generally not made by the writer. They're made at a higher level. But at the end of the day, quality journalism and especially investigative journalism takes a tremendous amount of time, money, effort, and resources. I think if people knew how much labor went into every story, and that means labor on the reporter's end,

you know, on the editorial end from editors, you know, on a travel budget, and also on the legal. And, you know, these stories are thoroughly vetted from a legal perspective and they go through exhaustive editorial review. You know, that takes money. And it takes a lot of work. It takes time. It takes money. And it takes a commitment from your company to decide that that's something of value and a service to

our readers. I'm very proud of the fact that the athletic has chosen time and time again, that this is something that we value and that we will devote time, money, and resources to. I think you are seeing fewer and fewer outlets and entities willing to do that. And so, you know, if you want that sort of accountability journalism and, you know, investigative of journalism, you have to be willing to understand that that requires, it requires support. And we're certainly really also grateful for all of our subscribers that always show us that it's very valuable to them and that they're willing to support it too. You know, I guess the one other thing that I would tell you is, you know, this story today

was broken by the Toronto Globe and Mail. Again, an excellent publication. Robin Doolittle's incredible. you cannot walk up to a newsstand and take a newspaper off the newsstand and just walk away with it. I mean, it's a good or a service. And I would say, you know, all work should be treated with dignity and all work should be valued. And I think, you know, everyone deserves to be paid for their work and the services they provide. And that certainly is not limited to journalists.

There you go. Well, well said. and better than you can say in 280 characters or whatever it is. Exactly. We're allowed on X. Okay, Katie, thank you so much. I know it's a busy, busy, busy day for you. Actually, it's never not a busy day for you?

Like, you've got two kids to juggle and... One sick right now. I've had five snow days in the past week and a half. Yeah. Oh, boy. Of course. All right. Well, listen, thanks for in the midst of a sick child in snow days and all this

investigative stuff. We appreciate you dropping by the podcast for a few minutes. Of course. Thanks for having me. All right. There goes Katie Strang. America's version of Robin Doolittle. How about that? No, no. I think like if you're doing a Mount Rushmore, it's Doolittle, it's Westhead, it's strang. I mean, like, it's unbelievable. I agree. Like I'll just say this. Like I think just getting the opportunity to work with with Katie, it's like, I've learned a lot. And the fact that she is as incredible as she is and as down earth as she is, that's what makes her really special.

So I think the world personally of Katie, and I know we're teammates, but I think the fact that we, that I've gotten to know her through the fact that we're teammates leads to that. And I just think that she's been doing a lot of great work on this story. But we also need to. praise Rick Westhead and Robin Doolittle for their part in this story too. Because look, this is a story, especially in Canada. It is a massive deal.

It is something that we need to talk about because the culture of this sport has been damaged as a result of it. And it needs to be changed. And this could have easily just been a story that just hid in the background. and maybe we occasionally brought it up or it was one of those hearsay things where you meet up with a whole bunch of journalists and they talked to you about it at a bar at like 1130 at night just wondering why wasn't this reported more. But because of the work of those three and other people around them on their respective staffs and other spots too, this story has, it's an important story that has been given that creedance of importance because of the fact that. we have reporting on it. And I'm very, I'm very happy, I mean, in a weird bittersweet way, because this is a horrible story.

And I'm sorry that we have to focus as much time on it, but we do. But I'm happy at least that we are on, that we are both on an outlet that has provided coverage on this because it's in the one. Well, as I said, I think it's the most important story in hockey on Wednesday. It's not the only story in hockey on Wednesday. Utah Jazz owner Ryan Smith. His parent company, what's it called? Smith Entertainment Group? Yes.

Yeah, Smith Entertainment Group. They own the Utah Jazz. They put a statement out on Wednesday saying, I got it here, quote, that they have formally requested that the National Hockey League initiate an expansion process with the ultimate purpose

of bringing a franchise to Utah. So that's, boy, I don't want to be, I try not to be cynical. I don't want to be cynical guy, but dropping that story on the same day as this one, I can't help but be a little bit cynical, I guess that there was a bad story in the hockey world and they're like, hey, here's something to distract you with.

That's my guy. I hate that I'm cynical. I hate that that's where my mind went to. And I'm not saying that I'm right or I'm wrong. I'm just saying that that's how my brain is conditioned to think. Here's what I'll say to that. I think I understand why people feel the way that they feel. Ultimately, the NHL still loses.

Whether or not it was intentional for it to be brought up that way, the fact that the NHG, the fact that this is out there, there clearly was some kind of purpose for us to talk about this story. This is not necessarily a new, this is a surprise to us who have covered the NHL or have been aware of Ryan Smith and his intentions for a while that they want professional hockey in you, sorry, I shouldn't say professional hockey. They want NHL hockey in the state of Utah.

This is not a complete surprise. And if it wasn't for the hockey canada story, this would be the topic. What I can't say, I don't know if this is, if, to your thoughts about being cynical about this, I don't know if I believe it's a conspiracy. I do understand why people want to go that way. But ultimately, if you're the NHL and you want, I mean, mean, whether you want it or not, the idea, like if you're Utah, this is not the best day. The timing is not good.

I think we can all agree on that, right? I don't know if this was purposeful in any way. I don't want to suggest that. Well, I can all agree. I'm happy to suggest it because that's, again, that's how my cynical brain works. Fine. That's all. Sure.

But it's entirely possible that these guys behind it, like, had an embargo or thought about it. It had no idea that this happened. This could just be coincidental. timing and it could just be an unfortunate situation to happen. At the same time, I don't think you're necessarily, I'm not going to look at you and be like, how dare you make that connection. I don't think I want to come across as that. I just think I don't, I don't know if I believe it is my thing.

Did we determine a nickname for the Salt Lake City team? I don't know if we did. Storm and Mormons. I think I threw that out. It didn't work. What a great transition. Yeah. What a great transition.

Do we have a... No, but I'll say this up a bit. But I'll say this. Like hockey in Utah, I know a couple of people, they see that and they think, oh, no, like the 30-third team, where we're going to add all these different teams. Am I in the minority here for being excited at the prospect of another team being added, more opportunities for NHTS players?

Wait, you? Wait. Whoa, whoa, whoa, whoa. So we're at 32 teams now. And you're saying, let's do more. I just want to be clear on this. You're like, let's do more. Like, what's the number that, okay, what's the number for you where you're like,

okay, this is too much? Maybe like 40. I don't know if I have a specific number. So we could have 38 teams and you'd be like, you're good with that. I mean, but I just thought, but like I find like the band bases are so hyper local as it is are they really like they're most of them are going to care about their own franchise anyway like are we really going to sweat the fact that there's 30 whatever teams i mean 38 might be a bit much if you really think about it but like like 33 we already have 32 what's one what's two more

as long as it's equal as long as it's like equal on on on different conferences i don't know if i have a big problem with it i don't know if i see a big deal at at the end of the day like you know the money has to be made right and if the league feels it's viable, the next step is probably Houston or Atlanta. I'll tell you this. Salt Lake, man. If the league got to 35, 36 teams of Quebec City was one of them, would we still be complaining?

A lot of people want Quebec City as part of that list of teams. Would we still have those same complaints if Quebec City was part of that? Oh, man. I feel like 32 is enough. Okay. we now we can have a conversation about are those the best 32 markets we could have that

conversation promotion litigation oh my god dude I'd be covering I'd be covering the AHL I'd be covering the AHL if you think that is too much is that not a solution that could be done is that not something you could have it like 24 so four teams get relegated each year and four come up we can brainstorm it

I don't know I like people want to be Oh, no. I don't get it. People want to cheer for the league. They want it to be viable. They want it to see it succeed. They want all this stuff. But then the idea of expanding and adding more money to the revenue pot.

No, we don't want any of that. How does that make sense to me? That doesn't make sense to me. I don't get it. Like, I don't know, man. Like, I'm not saying every opportunity for growth or for the NHL should be praised. But at some point, like, money has to be made if they want it to catch up with some of the other teams.

Well, I'll tell you what. That's what I think. Let's bring in a guy who covers a team. That's an original six franchise. Not an original 21 or original 30. It's Flutu Shenzawa. Fluto, thanks for joining the Wednesday edition of the Athletic Hockey Show. How are you doing today?

Great. How are you, Ian, and Julian? Hey, we're great. What's the number for you, Fluto? We're just talking about this. if Fluto was commissioner and we told you you could have the ideal number of teams

is it 32 is it more than 32 is it fewer than 32 what's the number for you more yeah more look these you need I think I heard Julian say you got to make money right and look at the players too

I was talking to I was talking to David Postnerck about this particular issue this was last year he was still up for his new deal And he was saying, okay, yeah, I don't have to be the highest paid player in the league. But I look at some of these other sports guys. And look at the money that the top basketball, baseball, soccer, football players are making. Why shouldn't that be the same for hockey?

So the more money that comes in the door, and if that means more teams and if that means more jobs, and that means everything. Yeah. Yeah, how long have salary has been relatively stagnant for NHL players versus these other athletes are just getting paid so much money and relatively flat, maybe a little bit of an increase. So yeah, bring in some more teams. Fluto, you know what? You explained it a lot better than I could because, you know what, there are a lot of people who just, they don't care about the fact that the NHL should be seeing some growth and want that to happen, you know, for the viability of jobs. and other opportunities out there. Like, who cares about the idea about making more money?

Don't players make enough money as it is? Who cares about the fact that NBA players make that much? No, we don't need more expansion. We don't need more opportunities of growth of revenue for these NHL players who make 11 million. You know, about the same amount of money as a number six or a number seven guy on an NBA roster. Who gets a damn about any of that, Fluto? Who cares? It's amazing.

It's amazing. Like what? Some of these numbers of the other sports. Just incredible. And why shouldn't hockey? Now, I think hockey is just naturally going to be limited because let's face it, it's a niche sport professionally. And having seen it at the grassroots level, it's pretty limited in terms of how many

families can afford time, money, resources to get into hockey and sustain it through a kid's career. to say nothing of high school or college or professional play for hockey, it's just tough for families to invest. So you're naturally going to be dealing with a smaller player pool. So that's just the reality of hockey. Until there's some way to open the door to more people, to more families, to more players, it's going to stay in the sport.

But, yeah, there should be more money to be made when their opportunity is there. So, Flittle, listen, we brought you on to chat about the Bruins, the team that you cover that once again, top of the division, once again, potentially in the running for President's trophy. That game on Monday. Was that a state, Julian and I had a good debate about, you know, who's that a statement game for? Is it a statement game for Winnipeg, a statement game for Boston, four-one win for the Bruins, first team to score more than three on Winnipeg in a couple of months. How much of a statement game was that for Boston? well and Jim Montgomery said this the other day and I agree he didn't see Winnipeg was just a little flat they weren't sharp so they were a little bit off offensively they were still pretty good

defensively there were stretches of that second period where I was like this is such a boring game to watch and and the coaches talk about structures sticks details and there was all that but it was it was a really there was nothing happening for the second period but for the third yeah Bruins They kicked it in. And if you look at this, that Winnipeg game for the Bruins, it's one within a current segment, which this is clearly the best that they're playing. Now, perhaps their record was better at times earlier in the season, but that was because of A, Posternak, and then B, Swamen and Olmark.

You could look at those three as being probably their most valuable players. And for a while, it was either Posternak or the goalies carrying them through some stretches where it wasn't clean, it wasn't crisp. But these last five games or so, there's been a 3-0 win over Jersey, a win over St. Louis. Colorado was within that segment. This is the best the Bruins have played.

It's not just goaltending. It's not just Posturenik. It's balanced offense. It's really good defense, too. Got attention to detail. Good sticks, good reloads, not much time spent in the defensive zone. So you look at everything that the Bruins have gone through this season where they've been,

I thought for a while their record was better than what their game was. I thought maybe there were at least three teams in the East, at least that were better than the Bruins. I don't know if I could say that now, the way that they're playing. It's been pretty impressively. How have the Bruins been able to be as good as they've been without Patrice Bergeron and David Kreichie as their top two centers? With Boston Bruins, and I say this almost lovingly in a way, I don't want people to take the wrong impression when I say this. The Boston Bruins are the equivalent of a cockroach in a nuclear war. They should be dead.

They're not dead. They're not dead. They're still kicking around. And not only are they kicking around, they are kicking ass in the regular season. How are they doing this? Well, Posternak. It's, he's one thing that we've seen, Julia, in this season is that he's not like, you know, there's just some, wings that really lean heavily on a center to get them the puck.

Avecgen comes to mind. And perhaps that's why he's besides age, I'm sure he's feeling the effects of not having backs from giving him a puck. David is not like that. Jim Montgomery has compared him to guys like Panarin, cane, those types of wing, a goodro from perhaps years ago. Wings that can really push the pace offensively, and they don't, I say this respectfully, It doesn't matter who their center is.

They're going to have the puck. They're going to create. They're going to make plays. They're going to go to the net. They're going to shoot from, in David's case, the left side one-timer is bread and butter. So it's been, yeah, it's been lately Charlie Quill. He's been very good, Charlie Quill. But Morgan Geinky has never been top-line center.

Pavel Zaka played left wing pretty much all of last year. He's been David's center too. So it just shows that, okay, there's some good, flexible, versatile players that they have at center, Zarka, Coil, geeky. You've seen Trent Frederick play center. They've got young guys that are tailing off in terms of Matt, Potcher, Johnny Beecher. But they've all been okay at center, but, yeah, David's been the key. Other than that, it's been the defenses played better. And they thought that was going to be the strength of their team.

It wasn't for a while just because they had so many returning guys. But now you're starting to see McAvoy, Lingholm playing to their levels. Grizzik has elevated. And then the goalies. That's okay. You can say Islander is a good. What other? Winnipeg slightly.

That's not a real tandem. But they're both their goalies have been excellent. But I don't see any other tandem. Pure rotation being better than Jeremy Sweman and Minnesota. Yeah. And you look at it, right? Yeah, 26 games for Swamen. 22 games for Allmark.

So tell me this, Fluto. It's game one of the Stanley Cup playoffs tonight. Linus Allmark, Jeremy Swayman are both 100% healthy. Who starts and how much of a conundrum is it in Jim Montgomery's head or is it pretty clear cut? Clear Swamen. It's kind of like last year where they were good. They're both very good. But it was clear that Allmark was better than Swamon.

So Linus was their game one goalie. and it ultimately wins the Vesina. I don't know if Jeremy is going to beat out guys like Hellebuck or whoever, Demko or whoever is up there. I don't know. We'll have to wait and see until the end of the year. So Swam in Game 1, but I think this should have been the case last year with a rotation in the playoffs.

If it's Swamen in Game 1, it's Allmark game 2. There is absolutely no doubt why. It's historically been, okay, ride the goalie, the hot hand in the playoffs. Why? We've seen why change, and I asked Montgomery this last year, why change something that's worked for you all year, all regular season? And then the most stressful games of the year, okay, let's just ride one. And then that was reason number one, the Bruins lost in round one. Lena Solmart, he fell apart.

It was physically, mentally, it broke down. And then by the time they switched to swimming too late. So absolutely, and Jim has said, he would absolutely consider it this year. pure rotation in the playoffs. Just every other game, Swamen, Allmark, Swainman, Allmark, Greenlight to that. I want to go back to Ian's hypothetical situation here, which is probably not going to be hypothetical.

They're going to make the playoffs. Game one of the San Lankham playoffs with the Boston Bruins, TD Garden, where will Patrice Bergeron be? He's going to be in the stands, right, watching. Not in the lineup. It'd be in the rocking chair. Maybe he'll be there cheering on his teammates, but yeah, he's done. He's not going to play anymore.

Love how we just like flatly just like, he's not coming back because so many other people it feels as if they've tried to ask him that question. Like, are you coming back? Are you going to play with the team? Dude seems happy and retired. He's just, he's one of those guys. Once he's made up his mind, that's that. And I'm sure he thought about a long time. time. I'm sure he thought about a long time last year, too, when he was thinking, okay,

because his contract was up, and then he ultimately signs for one more year, and he took some time, and then he ultimately decided to come back. But, yeah, he's done. He's happy with his life. He might, and there was some question in terms of, because he's still around in the Boston area, but who knows? Maybe he says, okay, I'd like my kids to be immersed in the French, Canadian culture. Maybe they move back to Quebec City, where, the wife is from too. So that wouldn't surprise me either. But no,

it's playing careers over. Well, listen, Flitto, we appreciate you popping by, giving us a little context on the Bruins and where they're at right now, big game against Carolina here on Wednesday night.

That should be a lot of fun for people to pay attention to, kind of a battle. Carolina's just finding their groove. Boston's had their groove all year. Should be a fun one at TD Garden tonight. Thanks for dropping by the podcast, and I'm sure we'll be chatting again with you real soon.

Okay, Julian. Have good one. All right. There he goes. Fluto Shinsawa, one of the, the guys that has covered that Bruins team. He's been around that team a long time. Really just has a feel for them,

an understanding of kind of the recent history, the longer history, just does such a great job covering them. And it's another year where the Bruins are just, like you said, like this is, it should be smoke and mirrors, right? Didn't we write their obituary two years ago?

Yeah, I did. And even last year, I mean, we predicted that they were going to not make it to the stay at a final a lot sooner than we thought was going to happen. But yeah, it ended up getting to that point. But for some reason, they're still alive and kicking. It'd be one thing if this team was in that mushy middle that people hate where they were trying to fight for a playoff spot and you're looking at them, you're like, man, this team should really rebuild.

they've been one of the best regular season teams over the last two years. Yeah. Like, what do you do? Like, they've been really good. And I'm glad that that Fluta was able to lay it out as well as he did with guys like David Pastronach in the goaltending situation helping them up. The Bruins are, or a contender. And we've hyped up all these teams in the West, like a Winnipeg and a Vegas and a Vancouver.

Are we at a point where we're underrating the Bruins a little bit? Like, I don't know where they stand among those contenders. Yeah, imagine winning a president's trophy, setting a record. and then the year after we're like, we're not taking them seriously. Like, it's true. It does feel like a lot of people are sleeping on the pros. Let's open up the mailbag, shall we get some emails to get to the Athletic Hockey Show

at gmail.com, the athletic hockey show, gmail.com, or leave us a voicemail. We'd love to hear your voice, 845445, 8459. This one from Alex. Actually, and by the way, so I got, and maybe this is the same Alex that stopped me at the train. station today. I left Montreal today, Julian. And as I was getting on the train to Ottawa, a guy behind me in the line says, excuse me, are you, Ian Mendez? I said, yeah. He says, he says, you know what, I thought it was you. I was kind of sure it was you. And then I heard you talk.

And I knew it was you. He's like, I listened to your podcast all the time. And he was talking about how we listened to you and I on Monday. And his name was Alex from Barry, Ontario. And I don't know if this is the same Alex. But if it is, I appreciate. you're saying hi in the train station, and Alex has written into the show saying, enjoyed, listen to you guys, chatting with Sean Magadu, down goes brown, about the WWE streaming on Netflix,

what the NHL should be looking at. It reminded me of some exciting news, hearing that Amazon has bought a stake in Valley Sports. So those games will be streamed on Amazon Prime. Eventually, I refuse to buy Bali to watch the Predators because of the cost. As a person who already has Amazon Prime, I think this is great.

What do you think of all of this? that's from Alex. I'm thinking to the different Alex if, you know, he's, this sounds like an American with, with, Amazon and Bali and all that.

But it was interesting, wasn't it, Julian, that Amazon jumped in and kind of got into the, the, the, the, the,

the, the, the ballie game, so to speak, because it does make you think that down the road, there's going to be an opportunity for that. Yeah. I,

I think we all have to embrace, uh, more of a streaming future for the national hockey league. there are the days now where we're in those days now where you can turn on your TV if you have cable and it's there. But the idea of watching NHL games on your Google Chromecast or your Amazon Prime account or on your fire stick or Apple TV. You already do that for Major League soccer with Apple TV. It's just going to be more and more of the norm. or like in the NFL, they had that game on peacock during the playoffs.

It is what it is. It's just going to be part of the norm. That's what I think. It's just live sports are still a hot commodity. Yes. That's just what it is, right? Like, we see what's going on with some of the different shows and the strikes and stuff like that. But for live sports and programming, that still brings a large mass of people together.

It depends on the league, of course. But like, especially for hockey, it's still. does that and there's no surprise. I'm not completely surprised at different streaming giants are clamoring to get sporting rights. Okay, riddle me this, my friend. If you, if NHL teams went to a streaming service, but it was a pay per game

model, meaning you could kind of go out of cart. What would be the price point that would kind of be like, would it be $3 a game, $2 a game? Like, would that, do you think that that has any traction? Because

there might be a situation where you're like, you know what, Ottawa's in town today. I don't really feel like watching them. They're struggling. They're playing my favorite team. They're not very good. I'm not going to watch that game. But then, you know, three nights later,

it's Boston or it's Colorado and you're like, I'm in. Like, do you think that that has potential or no? Like, pay-per-view is not a model for the big four sports and in particular in the NHL. It's a good question. I've seen it. The HL has something similar where you can,

buy like a day pass. Yeah. It's like, it's not that expensive. Yeah. I don't even know that I don't even know if it's $8. Yeah. Whatever it is.

Yeah. Um, in Canada, we have the platform one soccer where they have rights for a lot of the, uh, Canadian soccer team, whether it's the male or the female teams and some of the games that they play,

uh, for those games that are not on TSN or sports that or what have you. And they also have a similar model where you can buy a one day pass or three days or whatever. Um, I feel as if a pay-per-view system wouldn't be all that foreign, and maybe it's something that the league or maybe other teams have looked into. I don't think it would be all that far-fetched.

It would get costly to, you know, imagine if you're doing out-la-cart and you're doing that for 82 games, that might add up. So I imagine you might want to, we live in a bundle world, so you might bundle it. You just say, hey, you know what? You subscribe for 160 or whatever. Maybe that's how it works. I wish I was a little bit more of an expert when it comes to streaming. But I think just the idea of pay-per-view, that's not out of the question, I would think.

At least that's how I would see if I was running things. And you can look off of other leagues and other entities that have done the same thing. Julia says I think most streaming thrives on the fact that you kind of forget how much you pay for it. If I had to face the fact, I was paying a certain amount of dollars for games, I would watch fewer games. That's a very important thing as well. Because, like, to do a la carte, A la carte. Oh, look at, anyway.

French Julian comes in. Le Giulien French. Time to get annoyed. But if you offer a deal, that is like once a month or like once a year, let's get discount. Look at this, this note we got from a presch who says MSG plus does have a pay per game option.

It's $10 a game, $30 a month, or $310 for a year. year. And that's in USD, presumably. $10 a game wouldn't do it for me because I'd be like, no. No, well, you'd have to, well, I'd want to pay $10 a month for the whole thing. That's it, but like you may have to look at what everyone else is doing, right? Like, I'll try to look this up really quickly here while we're talking about it. But like, what do you pay, like, let's say Netflix. What is it now, $14 a month?

Yeah, I feel like they're, they're bringing it. But like, let me show you something here. The H.L website, I have it in front of me. If you want to, you know, subscribe for the, a single day, 799, and that's in U.S.D. Oh, it is. Yeah. 799 in U.S.D. If you're in the NHL, they hate to take the side on this, how are you justifying charging less for the quality of the product that you have when the HL is charging $8 for a single day?

Why? No, but I'm not surprised at $10. The volume would be a massive difference, right? The NHL could get, if you did $5 a game, but I'm not saying, no, no, I'm saying for a single team, I'm not saying you get a one day passed for, excuse me, every game. I'm saying I like the Philadelphia Flyers. The Flyers are my team, but tonight, you know what?

They're playing Anaheim and, well, actually, wait, that's a terrible example because I want to see Cutter Go Che. They're playing like San Jose and I'm like, I don't want to spend the $5 on it, right? You know what I mean? You don't want to watch Macklin Celebrina or Celebrini? Maybe if he ends up there. Maybe.

I don't know. But I understand your point too. You might not want to do that. But like if you have it available to you, you still just have it. Just like with any other streaming site. Like you don't watch it every day, but you just have it. But to your point about the Alacart option, if you just have it, we're just paying for a game as a,

opposed to a single day, but even then I could still see the NHL just having it as a single day as a way to entice more people to watch as opposed to just having someone's attention for just two and a half hours and that's it. I don't know. Like I guess if they go that route, maybe you could justify charging less, but it also wouldn't surprise me if they look at that HLTV model and they double down on it and charged more because of the quality of their product. And while someone may say, excuse me, while someone may say like this expensive for $8, someone might still pay for it. It's like a diehard,

like a Canadian fan or a lease fan or whatever. They might still pay for that, begrudgingly, but they might still pay for it. Yeah, no, it's, and one more time, can we get the Julien Francais? Can we get, can we get you saying a la carte one more time? No, I'm not a public, bro.

Like, I'm not I'm not doing, I can do my, my, my, my, my, my,

my, in French, if you want, like, I'm not a puppet. I'm not, I'm not on command. I'm not going to do that.

I'm not going to say it. I'm not, okay, how about this? Can you tell me who a t-shirt? Who's the greatest player to wear number 66 in the NHL?

Oh, I hate you for this, because I, can't even say Josh I can't say Josh Hoseg as a joke. No, you can't. You know, it's funny? I don't even, I don't even say it.

I don't know why it does that. Just like, it happens. Mario Le Mieu, but I normally say Mario Lemieux. Like, I don't know why that happens. It's just, I don't know why that happens. I've watched my gel,

that's growing up. Okay. Are you happy? Are you happy? Is this just what this is? You're just like, you know what? We have him here on a Wednesday. He's speaking the French.

I might as well squeeze the left. Weez the lemon out as much as I can while I still have it. Is this what this is? As they would say in your home province, I'm very content. I'm very happy. Very happy. Well, I'm happy you're having fun.

Yes. I'm happy you're enjoying this. Julia writes in one more quick email here. You guys have had an ongoing debate about if you would change your team affiliation or root for a rival if your kid played for that team. Last night before the game, I learned that the Buffalo Sabers Tage Thompson and Ryan Johnson's dads are both coaches with the Anaheim duck.

So here is my question for you. If you were coaching a team that was playing against your child, would you give your team the no holds bar, dad dossier on your child? Like kind of the full scouting report. And would you tell your team

about every flaw and weakness or would you just try and beat them like they were another opponent whose diapers? Hell yeah. Hell yeah. I'm telling them everything. Who's to say my kid isn't go.

Who's to say my kid on the other side isn't going to my team going to their teammate saying, oh, my dad's coaching. He's going to make them run these plays. I remember this when he, from whatever. Like, who's to say the other side isn't happening? Hell yeah,

I'm doing it. I'm going to win. Yeah. I think so. I would be more apt to give my team trash talk material. Yeah. My child out there. Yeah.

Like at the face off, I'd be like, Hey, man. I heard you don't unpack the dishwasher. You know, just get under, get under his skin that way. Hey, you know that girl, you took to prom that one year, the one that dumped you in front of everybody? Yeah, I know about that story.

And you just skate off you do your thing. There you go. To a point, you don't want to get too delicious with it. That's why you went with that story. I feel a little too far, but like, yeah, you lean into it because the end of the day, you're competitors. And it's more fun that way. I don't think you, I don't know if either side would have.

appreciate the other going soft. There's a point to it, but it's supposed to be fun. Let's wrap up by looking at the fact that, look, the Edmonton Oilers, I made a mistake. I said that it felt like the stars were aligning for Columbus to beat Edmonton. What did I call it? The trappiest game that ever trapped. The trappiest trap game ever seen.

The trappiest trap game of any trap game that ever trapped. And it didn't happen. Edmonton won that one easily. Oilers up to 14 consecutive. wins three off the 92-93 Pittsburgh Penguins who won 17 in a row only to be

David Volicked out of the playoffs in round two. Oof. That's a verb, right? David Volick. They got Volick down. I love that because it's Ray Ferraro, and I love Ray, and Ray Ferraro sets up

David Volick for that. Anyway, I'm asking, this week, Edmonton plays Chicago. They play Nashville. We're anticipating Corey Perry. We'll play the Nashville game. If they win them both, they'll get the street to 16, and then they're off because of the All-Star game and the bye week,

and then they take on Vegas after the break. Do you want to see them now that now that they're at 14 are like, yeah, you know what? Let's run this thing to 20. Or where are you at with this? I think for the sake of a story, it'd be fun to see them go to 20. They're not going to do it.

I feel like whether it's those two games you mentioned before the break or the games they get after that layoff, at some point you run out of gas, you keep it, it doesn't continue to go and the streak ends. And then the pressure comes off, and then you just go out and play like every other game. I remember hearing Chris Knoblock, the head coach, say that they don't talk about the streak in there.

And there are other people around the team who try to talk about that winning streak. At some point, like, you look at the amount of Ws that you've racked up and you think, like, hey, we can really keep this going. I mean, you probably don't think about it to a certain point where you're like, man, we want to beat the Penguins record. But you're definitely not upset about the fact that you're winning all these games. But at some point you lose. At some point you have a game where you're going to get. get goalied where you just don't have it and your streak end. And I'm inclined to think that we're going to see it before it gets to that 20 mark.

Fearless prediction. But if they do it, that's awesome. I would have figured I would have said I'd like to see the winning streak go to 32. And then you would say, no, no, no, 32 is not enough. I wanted to go to 40 or 38. Can I just say something here? I realize I got worked up about that topic. I shouldn't have gotten as upset as I did.

I was visibly frustrated for those who are watching. I do not. I do not want that, Ian. I respect the fact that we have these back and forths and we're allowed to disagree on things. And I would not like to end this episode. You've gone to like a very like happy place now. Yeah. I just, I just no sense being upset about these things.

Just all you have to say is too short. All you have to say is jim excuse. Schm excuse. Zim excuse. lucky I'm not swearing in French. I don't know how that's trouble that would get me on the show. Oh, man. Okay, well, we're going to leave it there.

What is it? Yeah, seven games on top of the NHL tonight. So Haley Salve and Max Bolton, Sean Gentile. They might be able to weigh in on some of those things, depending on how the evening goes. They've got the Thursday edition of the athletic hockey show coming your way. As you expect, it's a Thursday edition of the athletic hockey show. What else?

Yeah, what other day? Is there another day that they'd be up? I painted myself. It's the Michael Scott, how the turntables. I just painted myself into a corner. Get ready for the Thursday edition of the Athletic Hockey Show coming your way.

Thursday? I don't know. Thursday? Yeah. Thursday's a great thing. Great stuff. Man, what a professional broadcasting. Professional, yes.

Yeah. Yeah, yeah. Professionals in air quotes. Listen, thanks for hanging out with us here for the hour. Leave us a rating and review. you, you can follow our hijinks, YouTube.com slash at the athletic hockey show. Right now, a one-year subscription to the athletic is available to you for $2 a month when you visit theathletic.com slash hotline show.