Don't Rush to Condemn Kane

It's amazing what people will believe.

Buffalo police say Patrick Kane beat a cab driver over not being able to get 20 cents in change. 20 cents, people. That is incredible and warrants some skepticism.

What's happened since then?

Jan Radecki, the cab driver has hired an attorney, Andrew Lotempio. But, instead of seeing dollar signs and signing up a personal injury attorney to go after Kane, the cab driver hired a criminal defense attorney. That suggests, of course, that the cab driver is worried about going to jail over this. So there is definitely a possibility that the cab driver was the one in the wrong.

Said attorney then goes public, saying the incident is "overblown" and definitely "not a robbery" as had been accused. Again, consistent with the theory that the cabbie was in the wrong--because if LoTempio can get the prosecutor to drop the charges against Kane, Kane can be persuaded not to go after the cabbie. If LoTempio wanted cash in a civil suit, it would not be in his interest to diminish the criminal case. The civil case would be much stronger after a conviction, obviously.

Now, ABC is reporting that a witness stated that the Kanes were the victims, and Radecki's neighbors are accusing him of "having a short temper and being involved in disputes with customers in the past." And that he locked the pair in the cab while "waiting for payment." But even according to the police, the fare was paid, with change due.

My theory: Mr. Radecki wasn't pleased with his tip, and locked the pair in his cab to try to extort more from them. The Kanes then resisted with force. It fits the facts, makes more sense than the $.20 motive, and explains why Radecki hired a defense attorney who has been playing this incident down.

Facta Non Verba

Funny how the athletes with the biggest mouths are the ones who always end up eating their words:

[Willie] Mitchell may have given the Hawks some bulletin board material when he dissed Kane, who scored two goals in Thursday night's 5-3 Vancouver win.

"He was Johnny on the spot," Mitchell said of Kane, a 70-point player for the Hawks in the regular season.

"That's his thing, he got a gift on a turnover on one in front of the net and the other one was just a power play and it was kind of a rebound that went right to him. That's kind of his game, he's kind of like [Sidney] Crosby that way. Crosby will stand off to the side of the net and not really be involved in things and get a lucky rebound and put it in the net. He kind of has that puck luck.

"Like I said, I think he got a gift on both goals and he was really quiet, I thought, and for the most part their team was really quiet. He's a fine player, but I think where he is going to do his damage is on the power play. He is not a guy who is really going to hurt us even strength, so that is kind of where we have to be aware of him."

Later that night, Patrick Kane responded with deeds instead of words:

Per 3

Time 5:48

Str EV

Team CHI

Goal Scorer 88 P.KANE(5)

Assist 19 J.TOEWS(5)

Assist 22 T.BROUWER(1)

VAN on Ice 1, 8, 13, 17, 38, 55

The reason Kane was able to get this goal? Willie was covering him, then decided to stop paying attention to him, and left him alone in the corner. (Willie is #8.) Kane took a pass and got to the net unopposed, thanks to Willie having better things to do than cover his man.

How's that taste, Willie?

Honor: Never Do Anything Today That You Won't Be Proud of Tomorrow

As humans, we are all fallible.

Such was the case two nights ago when New Jersey Devils Goaltender Martin Brodeur blew a gasket over the official not calling interference over a bump outside the crease, just prior to the Carolina Tropical Storms* scoring the game-winning goal.

Brodeur had a fit, swearing at the officials in his native French, smashing his stick against the boards, and then throwing it to the ice.

After that, he had to answer to a power higher than the referees, or even the commissioner:

And when he woke up at home in New Jersey on Wednesday morning, his youngest child, Annabelle, walked into his room and said:

"I saw what you did last night, Daddy," Brodeur recalled.

The goaltender then asked his daughter what he did. She refused to say.

"So I said: 'OK, I won't do it again, sorry,"' Brodeur said with a laugh indicative of a proud father.

I think he gets it.




*The team formerly known as the Carolina Hurricanes has been downgraded. See this and this.

NBC Sports: Quit your QQing!

Full disclosure: I'm from Chicago, so as a matter of principle, I oppose the Red Wings. I'm also tired of them being so good year after year. While I respect the team for their fundamentals and style of play (which has cleaned up a lot since the Blackhawks were a serious rival to them), I support the Penguins for the Cup this year.

With that note aside, I gotta gripe about NBC's whining about two goaltender interference calls in OT last night. They said there was no consistency and implied they were "soft" calls. They flat out called them wrong calls, and said that if they had led to goals it would have been a terrible way to decide the game.

NBC, kindly shut the hell up. First of all, everyone knows consistency is a problem. And YOU are not consistent about griping about that inconsistency. We all know that obstruction hooks, interference, holds, etc. go uncalled all the time b/c the ref doesn't see it or doesn't think it was substantial enough to merit a penalty. What is substantial enough varies from one ref to the next, or sometimes from one period to the next with the same ref. Yet, you insist on saying things like "whenever you get the stick horizontal across a player's body, there will be a penalty." Bullshit. The refs try to do a good job, but they're not perfect.

But these two calls weren't bad or inconsistent by any means. They were easy to make and clearly right. Both involved an offensive player knocking the goaltender around inside the goal crease. It's clear cut. It doesn't matter that an offensive player is expected to drive to the net. He can do so without going in the crease. So what about all those other times when there is contact between a player and the goaltender in the crease when there is no call? That's easy. Those are non calls because almost invariably, the offensive player wound up in the goal crease because a defenseman shoved the opposing player into the crease or knocked him on his ass causing him to slide into the crease. Neither Detroit player that was called last night had any help from the defense.

Easy. Obvious. Stop your whining.

Super Bowl!

Go BEARS!

That is all.