The pot started simmering as the hockey world turned its attention to draft weekend, when Boston General Manager Peter Chiarelli told the media the only “untouchables” (i.e. untradables) on the Bruins were goalie Tuukka Rask and the #2 draft pick the Bruins had acquired from Toronto. Once the Bruins chose center Tyler Seguin, the lid blew off.

The Boston Bruins are shopping Marc Savard!

Trying to pin down the source of rumors is something like trying to find the source of the Nile. It’s a trip through the jungle, with a thousand wrong turns and dead ends. It appears the trickle begain with TSN’s Darren

Dreger, who Tweeted about the Toronto Maple Leafs expressing “some interest” in Savard. But what really turned that trickle into a stream was TSN’s Bob McKenzie, the Grand Poobah of hockey reporting, who said “IF Marc Savard goes to TOR, and there is a chance it may happen, Kaberle won’t be part of it. It would be a ‘softer’ trade.”

Now the stream turned into a veritable flood. The Boston Bruins want to dump Marc Savard because they need to get under the cap!

And then, of course, came all the attendant flotsam and jetsam washing through the airwaves and the Internet. Questions about Savard’s character, about his teammates’ feelings toward him. Rumors that he had requested a trade (later proven untrue), that he’d been asked to waive his no-trade clause (also untrue). Rampant speculation about who he’d be traded FOR.

And under it all, from the more thoughtful hockey fans, a sense that the entire proposal made no sense whatsoever. Why would the Bruins, a team whose offense struggled mightily last year, but a team with legitimate Stanley Cup aspirations, trade their top point-scorer, who had just a few months before signed a cap-friendly deal ($4 million annual hit) with an eye to spending the rest of his career in Boston? In a soft trade, no less, to get under the cap? It just didn’t add up.

Meanwhile, the flood of rumors churned merrily on. Savard is going to Los Angeles. Savard is going to Calgary (for Robyn Regehr). From James Murphy (ESPN.com/Boston): “Interesting tid-bit from one of my most trusted sources: ‘Don’t rule out Chicago and Ottawa trading for Marc Savard.’ Sharp? Spezza?” (Never mind that Spezza’s cap hit is 7 million dollars!!)

Finally, just as Murphy and his merry band of media cohorts were crossing the line from ridiculous to ludicrous, Bruce Garrioch of the Ottawa Sun tracked down Savard himself:

“They hurt me a little bit just because I went to Boston and I helped to build that team back up,” Savard said in his first public comments since trade rumors started running rampant. “I’ve really tried to work hard with the young guys and being a core player. I was really focused on staying there for the rest of my career. To hear all this stuff this summer bothered me inside more than anything else. Right now I’m a Bruin and that’s the way it is, but it’s been tough.”

Now the tide began to turn, helped along by Bruins broadcaster Jack Edwards, who wrote an It Would Be Stupid For The Bruins To Trade Marc Savard, And They’re Not Stupid manifesto for NESN.com, which caused

 James Murphy go into a rage on Twitter, with a rapid-fire series ranging from the likes of “I don’t want them to trade Savard, I was just reporting it!” and “My integrity is being questioned!” to “I got the Nathan Horton deal right!”

But the final word came from Chiarelli, via the Boston Globe, on Sept. 3:

“Chiarelli talked to Savard after reading his comments and told him he would not be traded. Savard had 10 goals and 23 assists in 41 games last season, as he was sidelined by foot, knee, and head injuries. ‘I made it clear that I was not moving him,’ Chiarelli said. ‘I wanted to make sure Marc knew he was part of the organization.’’’

Lessons learned (or remembered):

1. Don’t believe everything you hear/read.
2. If it doesn’t make sense, odds are it won’t happen.
3. Some media are more interested in being first than being right.

Photos: Marc Savard from swerve at bestlaidplans.org; James Murphy from bostonsportsmedia.com

Bob McKenzie has the right idea. A few days after the opening of the free agent market, he took himself off on vacation and, other than a couple of Kovalchuk comments, has mostly Tweeted about his hammock and golf game.

Other NHL media folk would be wise to follow suit. Or at the very least, as my mother used to say, think before they speak (or type, or Tweet).

Unfortunately, too many hockey media, with too much time on their hands, too eager to listen to any whispered rumors (whispered by whom? Agents, perhaps? Perish the thought!), are too ready to pass along any ridiculous crap they hear and call it “news.”

Case in point: The Boston Bruins are interested in Bill Guerin.

The story “broke” from St. Louis (St. Louis?) on July 27, in the midst of Blake Wheeler’s salary arbitration hearings. The New England Sports Network’s web site picked it up:

The Bruins could be welcoming back a familiar face to the Hub as the team is speaking with Bill Guerin about a potential return to Boston, according to Radio host and St. Louis Blues writer Andy Strickland.

“The Bruins are talking to veteran Billy Guerin,” Strickland Tweeted Tuesday. “They need to make a roster move before they can sign him…”

OK, obviously nobody stopped to ask one simple question. No, not WTF? (though I’ll admit that’s the first thing that crossed my mind.) The question would be “Why?”

The Bruins already have their Designated Old Guy. They’re in cap hell, and are going to have to move a player or two even without signing any free agents. Though they haven’t hung out signs saying “We’re going with a youth movment,” it’s fairly obvious to anyone paying attention that they’re aiming to get younger and more dynamic, with Tyler Seguin only the tip of their young prospect iceberg; they’ve got some real talent knocking on the door.

In a nutshell, signing Bill Guerin would make no sense whatsoever.

Meanwhile, that bastion of sports journalism The Bleacher Report picked up the story, with an added twist:

Reports from NESN have stated that the Boston Bruins have significant interest in veteran winger Bill Guerin.

Oooh, so now it’s “significant” interest!

The story grew, making it onto both of Boston’s sports radio stations, as well as ESPN’s web site. For 24 hours, Bruins fans hotly debated the pros and cons of the Return of Bill Guerin.

Until Joe Haggerty of CSNNE.com came along:

…A Bruins source told CSNNE.com Wednesday [July 28] there was no interest on their part in the 39-year-old free agent winger.

A Bruins source. Imagine that. A member of the media picked up the phone and, y’know, actually asked someone in the Bruins F.O. about it. Responsible journalism – who would have thunk it?

(And when you’re praising Joe Haggerty as a bastion of responsible journalism, you’re in trouble. But that’s a commentary for another day.)

However, like Monty Python’s iconic Black Knight, it’s not dead yet! Seriously. From yet another Bleacher Report blog (written on July 31):

I am hearing that Bill Guerin is generating interest from the Bruins, Penguins and Islanders.

And lest you think it’s just fannish blogs, think again…

Former Penguins forward Bill Guerin was linked to the Boston Bruins but given their limited cap space in the wake of their acceptance of Blake Wheeler’s arbitration award, they can’t afford him.

No, he wasn’t! It was a rumor, probably started by his agent, aiming to drum up interest… oh, never mind. Just go on vacation. Please.

Photos:  Bill Guerin from The Associated Press.  Mark Recchi from Getty Images.

Seriously, Bruins fans. You’re embarrassing me.

I knew when the Bruins lost four straight to the Flyers in the Eastern Conference semifinal that a significant percentage of  Bruins fans were going to go off the deep end, but it’s gone beyond ridiculous. Blogs calling for GM Peter Chiarelli and/or coach Claude Julien to be fired, half the team to be traded, HAVEN’T WE SUFFERED ENOUGH?

Enough already.

What short memories people have. How quickly they forget how mired in mediocrity the Bruins were before the Chiarelli/Julien administration. How many other teams would give anything to be in the Bruins’ situation right now?

I certainly expected frustration and disappointment. I didn’t expect the hysteria and stupidity that is running rampant in New England right now. Even the media has succumbed: Kevin Paul Dupont of the Boston Globe (sorry, I’m not going to link his joke of an article) wanted nothing less than an abject apology from Chiarelli at his end-of-season press conference. An apology for what, exactly? A team that was within a hit goalpost (by Milan Lucic, late in Game 7) of moving on to the EC finals despite its players dropping like flies? For not trading half the farm for Ilya Kovalchuk? (Fat lot of good he did for the Devils.) For trading Phil Kessel for Taylor Hall/Tyler Seguin?

I heard a caller to sports radio (yeah, stupid me, but I figured they would have moved on to baseball by now) complain that the Bruins were steamrolling the Flyers in the first three games, and then choked. Already with the revisionist history: The Bruins won the first game 5-4 in overtime, the second 3-2. The score of the third game was 4-1, but that was misleading; it was a one-goal game until late in the third, when a fortuitous bounce put the puck on Mark Recchi’s stick for the third goal, and then Patrice Bergeron added an empty-netter.

Game 4 was a 5-4 Philly win, and the turning point in more ways than one: the Bruins lost David Krejci and the Flyers regained Simon Gagne. Game 5 was the only lopsided game of the series, 4-0 Flyers; then back to one-goal games: Flyers 2-1, and 4-3. Bottom line, this is a series that, with a lucky bounce here or there, could have gone either way. I’m amazed that nobody in the hockey media seems to have pointed this out; guess they’re all too gleeful about the OMG THEY BLEW A 3-0 SERIES LEAD. Yeah, whatever. To paraphrase that noted hockey observer Getrude Stein, a loss is a loss is a loss.

Life goes on. You cry, you pick yourself up, you move on. You don’t let a loss, no matter how devastating, define your career (believe it or not, I actually got into a back-and-forth with a Bruins blogger who is certain this is going to RUIN THE FRANCHISE FOREVER. Seriously.)

Krejci: “It seems like every year we’re getting much closer. We were really close this year but it didn’t happen. Next season everybody is starting from zero points. It’s going to be a new season, new year and everybody’s going to have the same chance, so obviously we’re going to have a good year again, make the playoffs and make a good run.”

Well said. At least the players have some sense, if nobody else does.

Image: Boston Bruins logo from NHL.com.

Yet another “mainstream media” guy decides to rag on the NHL. So what else is new, other than the “No Olympic bounce!” bonus this season?

This time around, it’s Mike Freeman of CBSsports.com who is providing us such gems as:

I’m not certain how it happened and don’t know if it was possible for the NHL to stop it from happening but that once-captured post-Olympic hockey glow is now gone. It has dissipated into the ozone and the NHL is back to being ignored by most sports fans.

For the rest of his rant, mostly about how the NHL needs more scoring and is less popular than SpongBob SquarePants, here you go: NHL toils in anonymity

Anyway, my own reaction to this isn’t umbrage that the dedicated sports fans of the United States are stupidly missing out on something great, or that the mainstream media are disrespecting the greatest sport on earth. My reaction? Let them miss out. Please. And mainstream media? You too. Go stalk Tiger Woods or cover the NFL draft like it’s Armaggedon.

Hockey doesn’t need validation from the casual sports fan. It doesn’t need explosive growth. It doesn’t need 24/7 coverage on ESPN (don’t bother them – they’re busy lining up another interview with Pacman Jones).

And as hockey fans, we don’t need to have our sport endorsed by ignoramuses who think a 10-9 game would be more entertaining than a 2-1 game.

And if mass popularity is the measuring stick of success, then shouldn’t “The Dukes of Hazzard” be held up as a shining example of great television?

I cherish my fandom of a “niche” sport, and you should too. The “average” American sports fan is drinking rotgut, while we’re quaffing (and discussing the quality of) the finest wines the world has to offer.

But mum’s the word, OK? Let’s keep this to ourselves.