Bettman starting to give off signs that his time running the NHL may be nearing an end

My favourite Gary Bettman fight is the one he had in Toronto a couple of years ago with my Globe colleague, Robyn Doolittle.

At an all-star weekend presser, Robyn slapped the commissioner around pretty good on the topic of the Hockey Canada sex assault scandal. It was testy, back-and-forth stuff, the kind you only see in movies about journalism. Eventually, Bettman came as close as he ever has to losing his temper in public: “Are we having a personal conversation?”

I was in that crowd going ‘Ooh!’ every time Robyn landed a jab, but I went back to look for footage to refresh my memory. The Leafs’ YouTube channel still has video of the event up. The Doolittle vs. Bettman part of it has been excised.

Whoever reframed this little corner of history didn’t do a great job though. You can still hear Robyn’s name called by the moderator before a jump cut to a question about arenas in Arizona.

I wonder if that would bother Bettman. There are a lot of qualified lawyers working in sports, but none has ever been more lawyerly. I’d like to believe that Bettman is the sort of man who would want the record complete, regardless of how it makes him or anyone else look.

Bettman is 74. This will be his 34th full season running the league. Someone once told me that an artist who paints the same thing for 20 years is a hack, but one who does it for 40 is a visionary. That would mean Bettman is approaching visionary status. One wonders if that’s the signal to leave.

This new visionary streak was on display recently when Bettman did what he never does – start a fight (rather than just finishing them).

It was inevitable that Bettman would be asked about the rash of want-away stars in the league. It’s the most interesting thing going on in hockey.

Classic Bettman would have said something about needing to keep an eye on things and hey, look over there, could that be an expansion team in Austin?

New Bettman jumped in two-footed, saying no-trade clauses had spiralled beyond their “original intention.”

“If this becomes a problem, it’s going to become something we’re going to have to discuss with the players’ association.”

Bettman wasn’t doing his Marlon Brando impression as he said it, but he might as well have been.

Putting aside the issue of who was in charge when this went down (a certain Barry Gettman), what was the point of doing this?

It was a gift to the PA, who got to play Teamsters for a day. Its performatively angry response (“an attack on players’ … rights”) must have masked surprised delight.

Aside from plain dollars, no issue is as likely to bind together veterans and rookies as an effort to curtail their movement. The way it’s working now, the players get their cake and eat it too. If they want to stay, they stay. If they want to leave, they plant a PR bomb in their employers’ offices by demanding a trade. Only now beginning to understand how much power this gives them, no NHLer at any stage of his career is giving it up voluntarily.

It’s not an issue that ownership will go to the mat for. They’re running businesses, not playing for pride. What’s the owners’ percentage in starting a war with the union over something that’s almost impossible to unwind in the medium term? Roughly zero.

So why would Bettman, a man so given to temperance, tear open this can of labour worms with his teeth? Could it be as simple as Bettman believing it is the best thing for hockey (which it is)? If so, that’s the brightest flashing indicator that his professional end is near.

Once you’re into the good works portion of your career, as opposed to the kicking people below you off the ladder part, you’re thinking legacy. Legacy implies an ending. An ending requires a few big ideas to leave behind you when you go. They act as both an inspiration to your successor, as well as an unavoidable banana peel.

A friend and I were discussing home renovations the other day. He said that whenever his wife mentions some big ticket item that needs tackling, he says to her, “NGP.” Next guy’s problem – as in, their house’s future owner.

If he’s smart, no-movement clauses are Bettman’s version of NGP. And few executives work smarter than he does. People love to hate on the guy, but no modern commissioner has done more to steady their sport. Look at Cathy Englebert’s chaotic rule in the WNBA. That’s how simple it is to get it badly wrong.

It’s easy to be Roger Goodell or Adam Silver. Go to the owners, invite them to put their hands up the back of your shirt, move your mouth in time to their voices, make money money make money money money. Unlike his peers, Bettman had to actually run the NHL.

The league has always been an unruly beast – a cold weather sport that needs to live in warm climates in order to scale. Again, not a problem for any other league. But the NHL is only getting more unruly. This Canada vs. America split is not going to stitch itself up. Someone’s going to have to get in there with the sutures.

That job is more than a couple of rule changes. It will require a multi-pronged, long-term plan. While you’re coming up with it, hockey is permanently one dumb comment by one embittered player from this thing getting truly out of hand. I nominate Connor Hellebuyck, on Instagram, after a long night out with the Tkachuk brothers.

Is Gary Bettman the guy to do this? Ten years ago, I could think of no one better. But given his very recent moves, I wonder if he’s interested in taking on any more fights that will need to go the distance.