Jump to content
The Official Site of the Vancouver Canucks
Canucks Community

Canuck Way

  • entries
  • comments
  • views

Pity for Mitchell



In the same offseason that Commissioner Gary Bettman receives a pay hike to $7.23 M per, Willie Mitchell will receive less money because of Bettman's indifference.

It's not easy being a Vancouver Canuck defenseman these days. In the 2009/10 season, the Canucks lost the most man games for blueliners. The competition arising from those stifling injuries is intense, with Keith Ballard and Dan Hamhuis being brought into the ranks. Willie Mitchell was hit from behind January 15th by Evgeni Malkin, and missed the remaining 48 regular season games, as well as two rounds of the playoffs, due to being concussed. Gary Bettman's inability to put together proper discipline for headshots and dangerous play was a direct contributor to Willie Mitchell's plight. There's a certain amount of travesty, if not irony, stemming from the fact that players like Willie Mitchell lose money (which I'll get to briefly) while the professed Commissioner gets a pay hike.


Mitchell would rather take a Pronger punch than watch Bettman sit on the fence regarding the headshots issue

The fact remains that, because of Bettman's indifference to the headshots issue, players like Willie Mitchell, ie - the "product", are set to lose money. Do you really think that Mitchell will land the kind of contract now that he would have been looking for this offseason? Perhaps more importantly, will he get the number of years that he was looking for?


If Willie has this picture up on his wall, it's surely backed by a dart board...

Please don't misread this; I am not a 'bleeding heart', nor do I secretly have a man-crush on Willie Mitchell. But I do sympathize with him, and particularly with his sentiments uttered at a press conference approximately 6 weeks ago. He is now considered "damaged product", and has been labelled the same way Eric Lindros was after his concussion. Essentially, fairly or unfairly, there are concerns regarding his health, and some GM's would probably be thinking that he's one big hit away from retirement.

My last muse on the matter: The biggest pity is that Canucks fans will almost certainly never know what could have been. If you don't believe that losing your best shutdown defenseman before the playoffs is a big deal, then the Stanley Cup winning GM Stan Bowman's words won't hold any meaning for you. "I think you win with defense. I think the success of our team is that we've got some very skilled forwards, but they get the puck a lot. We want to keep that part of our game intact."

With all that said, I truly hope Willie will again play meaningful hockey, be it in Vancouver, or even Edmonton or Washington for that matter. He knows full well that Mike Gillis' hands were tied at the beginning of Free Agency, and with 3 (defensive) contracts expiring at the end of next season, hehad to make a move. Believe me, should you ever read this Willie, that we WOULD have waited for you to heal if we could have. It sure would have made Round 2 very interesting. But time waits for no man... perhaps except the Commissioner. Sometimes it looks like he's got all the time in the world.

With files from Yardbarker, I'm Larenzo Jensen


Recommended Comments

do you know how much sense this doesnt make. this has nothing to do with bettman. malkin hit him and even if there was a headshot rule in place at the time (which it wasnt even it was from behind and his head hit the boards) he still woulda hit him

Link to comment

So, 'gnarbot', are you saying that Mitchell had no real beef? I'm not sure what you're getting at, because Mitchell did in fact appeal to the League and the NHLPA to look more closely at their stance on not only headshots, but also 'dangerous play'. I believe that hitting a player who is facing the boards (aka "boarding") qualifies as dangerous play, particularly because I myself have played for many years, as well reffed the game at various levels. It's my belief that Mitchell did in fact have a valid complaint. Were a policy in place on headshots and dangerous plays, I'm sure that Malkin's hit would have been examined more closely, possibly by a judicial committee, if not Colin Campbell. But because Malkin is a 'superstar' and there was no policy in place at the time, he got off scott-free. The point of the article was that Mitchell is the one holding the empty purse. If you were at work (I'm assuming here that you have a job) and you were injured on the job, due to no fault of your own, and another employee was involved in a dangerous act, I'm certain you would be looking for some sort of compensation. How else could you pay your bills? If there was no policy in place to protect your income, I'm certain you'd feel a lot differently than you appear to in your comments. If that same boss did nothing to protect you and your families well being, I'm certain you'd be rather choked to find out that he's getting a nice raise, when you're left destitute because he didn't buy into Workers' Compensation or something of that nature.

Link to comment

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in

Sign In Now
  • Create New...