Sporting Madness

Rick Rypien's death at 27 is a tragic story, and one that's resonated with a lot of people. Hundreds headed to Rogers Arena for an impromptu memorial Wednesday , while his teammates in Winnipeg mourned treatment programs and the role of fighting came to the surface. Information on what exactly happened to Rypien is still scanty, but for many of us, his death brought back memories of athletes who battled depression and wound up taking their own lives, such as Kenny McKinley and Dave Duerson . We don't know yet if depression led to Rypien's death, but it's played a major role in the deaths of others. Before Rypien's death, Sports Illustrated 's Pablo S. Torre wrote an excellent piece in this week's magazine on the suicides of Duerson, former San Jose Shark Tom Cavanaugh, former New York Yankee Hideki Irabu, American Olympic skier Speedy Peterson, former Duke basketball captain Thomas Emma and Austrian Olympic judoka Claudia Heill, and how they raise ...

Here's the conclusion of this point/counterpoint setting up the Stanley Cup Finals. Earlier, my old Queen's Journal colleague Mike Woods made the case for the Bruins. Here's my take on why I think the Canucks will win. The NHL playoffs are a funny thing, and the best team doesn't always win. In fact, as I've written before, contrary to the demands of narrative , the best team probably wins about 55 per cent of the time. That leaves 45 per cent of the time where upsets happen, and the odds may be even higher in a series like this that looks like it should be close. Thus, anything could happen here. If you're a betting man or someone making predictions, though, you want that 55 per cent chance over a 45 per cent one, and that's why I'm going with the Canucks. What Vancouver accomplished this regular season was nothing short of historic. They finished first in the NHL with 117 points, 10 ahead of their nearest competitor (Washington) and 14 ahead of...

To get you set for the Stanley Cup Finals, myself and former Queen's Journal colleague Mike Woods are running one of our traditional point/counterpoint pieces predicting who will win. First up, here's Mike to make the case for the Bruins. My piece on the Canucks will follow later before the series kicks off at 8 p.m. Eastern/5 p.m. Pacific today. Take it away, Mike! After the Boston Bruins’ nail-biting 1-0 win over the Tampa Bay Lightning last week that got them a berth in the Stanley Cup final, my first thought was that the series would be evenly-matched and picking a winner would be a toss-up. Instead, most people outside New England seem to be casting the Bruins as underdogs by a wide margin. It’s hard to blame them. The Vancouver Canucks are rolling; they tamed the San Jose Sharks in the Western Conference final’s first four games, then relied on show-stopping goaltending from Roberto Luongo in Game 5, who stopped 54 of 56 shots when his team faltered. A President...

Here's Mike's piece on why he thinks Arizona will win today's game: According to today’s New York Times, Kurt Warner wears number 13 to show that his spirituality overrides any need to be superstitious. If that isn’t enough to convince anyone of the Cardinals’ impending victory tonight, then it’s tough to know what else to say. In last year’s Super Bowl, Andrew wrote in the Journal that if the New York Giants played their best possible game and the Patriots faltered as they hadn’t before, the Giants had a chance to win. I countered that the game wasn’t even worth watching, since the 18-0 Patriots would run roughshod all over them. We all know what happened next, and I’ve been eating my words ever since. Even though analysis of every statistic and match-up flew in the face of a New York victory, the Giants managed to pull it out. This year’s Cardinals increasingly remind me of last year’s Giants. They’ve shown that with a quarterback who’s on his game (Manning or Warner), a...

Apologies for the lateness of this piece, the counterpoint to Mike ’s argument in favour of the Phillies. I got caught up in Journal work this week, as most of our sports contributors contracted severe cases of midtermitis, leaving me to carry even more of the load then normal (I wrote a personal-record five game stories, one column, one profile and one brief for Friday’s issue). Thus, there wasn’t a lot of time to do much of anything on the blogging front. In any case, though, with the Rays and Phillies splitting the first two games of the World Series, it’s still very much up for grabs, so I figured it would still be worth writing this piece: just consider it a preview of the best-of-five series that remains. In my far-from-expert opinion, the Rays are going to take this series. It’s going to be close, as the Phillies are a very talented ball club, but the Rays win this matchup on depth. That depth is a triple-barreled advantage; it’s present in pitching, offence and defence, and i...

Last year, former Journal sports editor (and current features editor) Mike Woods and I had a great tradition of writing point/counterpoint pieces around the major professional sporting events and issues of the year. He beat me in the World Series predictions (though to be fair, I was more making a case that the Rockies could win rather than they would), but I got my revenge in the Super Bowl . Anyway, we weren't able to fit a point/counterpoint on this year's series in the paper, but Mike and I figured we'd each write one for this site to keep the tradition alive. Here's his piece on why the Phillies will win. My case for the Rays will come later tonight. - Andrew Phanatical about the Phillies (Andrew's title) By Mike Woods No last-place team in any professional sport has won its league’s championship the following year. Admittedly, the Tampa Bay Rays have shockingly passed one test after another this season. It looked like their best days were behind them when ...

Stephen Brunt's Diamond Dreams is a classic for any fan of the Toronto Blue Jays. Published in 1996, it's an amazing retrospective into the history of the franchise. What's more impressive than the on-field action though is the clarity Brunt brings to the shady backroom maneuverings that are as much of a part of baseball in this day and age as "Take Me Out To The Ballgame" or the seventh-inning stretch. Along the way, we're treated to some interesting vignettes and character sketches of the key personalities involved: Pat Gillick, the withdrawn baseball genius, Don McDougall, the young, ambitious Labatt's president and eventual key ownership figure, and Howard Webster, the eccentric sport-loving millionaire. Perhaps the most interesting portrait, though, is that of a man still deeply involved with the franchise: Paul Godfrey, who The Tao of Steib recently called " a kitten-drowning baby shaker " for his plans to sell Jays' tickets to Red So...