Parrish the thought

I love* it when agents pimp their players to the press: "No really, there's interest in my guy! Tell the fans! Spread the buzz!"

*may be sarcastic

But it's particularly amusing when an agent ties the future of his average player to the future of a superstar. Don't get me wrong: The way Vancouver sees its cap situation, it very well may not sign Mark Parrish until they know Mats Sundin wants no part of them. But the implication that Parrish is a "Plan B" for Sundin's "Plan A" is laughable hyperbole. (Granted, these are not the agent's direct words, but all agents are guilty of false innuendo until proven innocent.)

The way the NHL circle of illogic works, Brendan Shanahan's future is also tied to Sundin's. (In this latter instance, it's not the agent but rather Blues GM John Davidson who's taking advantage of a little free agent uncertainty to milk fan nostalgia).

Now, the Canucks need offense from somewhere, and they've found the pickings slim this summer, so they may indeed bid on Parrish. But not by preference. It's like when the Mrs. sends me to a big box home store with a $10 off coupon. By God, there's nothing there I need or want -- certainly not a nice copy of NHL 2K9 -- but I'm too cheap not to use the coupon for something. So I come home with a throwaway pillow for the dog. Sundin is that piece of electronics you can't buy here; Parrish is the dog pillow.

Disturbingly, the agent (or perhaps the reporter from a different *cough* "source") also implies the Islanders have "inquired" about Parrish. Using my AgentSpeak-to-Truth(TM) conversion table, "inquired" is the least significant of verbs in the agent's rumor-mongering arsenal. Where "pursuing" means a team has made an offer and "interested" means they've discussed general money and term, "inquired" means they've talked and asked, "Is he desperate enough to take the league minimum? We'll even send a taxi."

So, though it's against their youth movement and a laughable suggestion, I suppose the Islanders may have asked about Parrish, reasoning that he would be easy insurance if he came cheap (not impossible, considering he will still be paid handsomely by the Wild).

But it doesn't make sense for our youth movement to sign him to real dollars, and he won't sign for a paltry sum (not with the Canucks throwing money around), so it's not gonna happen.

Nor do I want it to. I liked Parrish, he did good things as an Islander, it was too bad he had to leave the first time. But we knew in 2007 that he wasn't going to be worth what he would get from his home-state Wild, and now the Wild know that, too, having bought him out.

Plus, seeing him as an underachieving Islander in the sunset of his career would only remind of bad things, like the Mad Mike asset mismanagement move that first brought him here. Not Parrish's fault that he was acquired with a stiff for two guys who got much, much better after they left the Island. But still. Until my therapist works me through these issues, I cannot welcome him back. Like the hilarious Gnarls Barkley relationship breakup video, it shouldn't work this way, but it does.

So I'm sorry, Mark. Good luck in Vancouver.

What does Gordon see?

So New York reporters took a look at new Islanders coach Scott Gordon yesterday and liked what they saw: He was nervous about the big press to-do ("Ooh, fresh meat," they told themselves), but he stuck around an extra hour answering questions and he generally made sense. He explained his strengths in defensive systems, but he also left the appetizing suggestion that his team won't be strictly a modern-age trapfest: The man likes him some team speed and some forechecking.

Speed -- whether it scores or it recklessly runs off the rails -- is never boring. So the reporters and fans may have gotten what they want. GM Garth Snow definitely got what he wants. But other than an NHL job and better travel to games, did Gordon get what he wants?

Perhaps the more answerable question is: What does a new NHL coach see when he looks at the Islanders? Let's consider. Feel free to add yours:

Franchise Goaltender? Check. Outsiders may consider him merely "franchise" by default because of the contract, but Rick DiPietro showed last year that he has the head and the ability -- when healthy -- to carry a team. He was a huge key to their strong start, and before he was injured, longtime observers noticed how much he'd matured, both in efficiency of movement and in puckhandling decisions. The inevitable, exaggerated "is he playoff material?" debate can wait until he actually gets a fair shake in the playoffs.

A Margin of Error? Check. Gordon's not taking over the Sharks, who have the players and the expectations to win It All now, but have lacked the delivery. Instead, Gordon's taking over a team committed to youth (i.e. growing pains are expected), run by a GM who's plan and employment depends on making it work for the long haul with his hand-picked coach. Even if the club struggles this year, and possibly next year, it is likely Snow will stick with him for longer than a GM in another situation would.

Likewise, blame might fall on the players -- even the prospects: Remember, Snow thought the Islanders were a playoff team last year. He also thought the prospects should've played more under Ted Nolan, because we don't know what we have until they get their chance. With Gordon, they will get their chance.

A Defense He can Work with? Check (I think). Brendan Witt will jump on several grenades to stop a goal, then hobble his remaining flesh up ice to finish a check. Marc Streit provides enough puck-moving smarts to let us think the powerplay will inevitably improve. Andy Sutton can deliver intimidating open-ice checks (granted, it was under Ted Nolan's scheme) without getting all Pilon'd out of position. Radek Martinek is one steady Vaclav out there. Freddy Meyer, when given the chance last year, was a balanced mix of all of the above. And Chris Campoli and Bruno Gervais, when healthy, have the makings of solid 3-4 defensemen but may well be used as 5-6.

There are some "ifs" here, but this blueline corps has the mobility and a bit of size to do whatever Gordon asks. That said, I'm sure Gordon wouldn't refuse a Pronger if one fell from the sky.

Proven Scorers? Rain check. If he's looking at this lineup, Gordon has to be honest with himself and know there's not a single forward that makes him say, "Count on 20 goals from that guy." There's potential, sure, but you don't know when age catches up to Bill Guerin (Father Time says: "Soon."). You know Doug Weight, if he fully revives, will get his points from assists, not goals. Mike Comrie's season may depend on the chemistry that develops with his wingers (Kyle Okposo?). Okposo has 20-, juuust maybe 30-goal potential at this level, but that's a lot to ask from a rookie still in his first year as a professional. Jeff Tambellini received a long-term commitment that implies he will be a 20-goaler someday, but the jury is still far, far out on his NHL potential.

The glass-half-full perspective for Gordon is: a) This is where the speed and forechecking game comes in (if you can't blow them out, blow them up and convert the turnovers); and b) the assortment of pesky forwards with hands should get their share of goals: Bergenheim, Comeau, Sim, Sillinger, Hunter, Nielsen ... all guys who should at least score in the teens during a full season.

Of course, two 20-goal scorers and a bunch of guys in the teens is what the 30th-scoring Islanders had last year. Fedotenko, Vasicek and Satan tied for third-most on the team with 16 each. Gordon has to know scoring will remain a big chore, and if it improves, it will likely come from improving the 29th-ranked powerplay. Welcome to the party, pal.

Mid-Season Talent Infusion? Negative. Suppose the Isles are nibbling around a playoff spot at mid-season, but some injuries or glaring weaknesses threaten to spiral them downward. Will Snow swoop in and save the day? Of course not. It's not in the plan, it's not in the budget, and the Isles do not have the cupboard nor the inclination to part with any assets that could bring back legitimate help. Gordon must know this season's success depends wholly on the roster he saw during his job interview.

But that's where that margin of error comes in. I'm by no means down on the season's prospects -- if anything, I'm pleased with the hiring and ready to see how he works. But that is the perspective on the club I imagine a coaching candidate like Gordon took into the interview. It's a mixed bag, to be sure, but there are some bright spots -- not the least of which is the unspoken promise that he will get plenty of time to make the most of his make-or-break shot in the NHL.