Peter Berg's Wayne Gretzky documentary "Kings Ransom" premieres on ESPN a week from today (Oct. 6) to kick off the ambitious "30 for 30" series on the WWL that features filmmakers like Barry Levinson, Spike Jonze and John Singleton taking on an impressive variety of sports subjects both big-picture (the fall of the USFL) and specific ("Steve Bartman: Catching Hell").

That the Gretzky doc (see our review of the rough cut here) was chosen to lead off the series is interesting, considering the strained and strange relationship between ESPN and puckheads, even before the NHL bolted for Comcast's millions and the Versus network.

We spoke with ESPN "30 for 30" executive producers Keith Clinkscales (Senior Vice President Content Development and Enterprises) and that deliriously divisive author/columnist/podcaster/"Sports Guy" Bill Simmons about ESPN's relationship with hockey. Turns out the Gretzky doc wasn't the only one they were considering for the series:

Q. The relationship between hockey fans and ESPN has been interesting, to say the least, for the last decade or so. Do you think this Gretzky doc, as well-done as it is, can convince fans that ESPN will present hockey in an analytical and interesting light?

CLINKSCALES: We're very excited about the film, but we remain vigilant on hockey in our SportsCenter coverage and all of our coverages. We'll make sure that we pay attention to it not just more and more but stay excited about it. It's a great film, we're proud to have it, and we're proud to have Peter doing it; but this is a film that's leading our series. If that says anything about how we feel about the quality of the sport, the quality of the filmmaker and the quality of the subject, that statement is there. We feel very strongly about hockey.

SIMMONS: We actually had a lot of hockey ideas in the initial group, but like everything else in this project, it came down to what was the best match for each filmmaker. I remember in the initial list, there were at least four hockey ideas that were really great.

Q. Any spoilers for us Bill?

SIMMONS: I remember the New Jersey Devils' trap. We seriously thought about one about the Devils' trap and whether it killed hockey. And then we were like, 'Who would want to watch a whole documentary about the Devils trap?' It was bad enough when it happened.

Whether or not Simmons was goofing around: Great answer, huh? Would have made "The English Patient" seem like "Die Hard," but a great answer. Coming up, Peter Berg ("Hancock," "Friday Night Lights") on what he learned from revisiting the Gretzky trade.

Here's Berg:

Q. Did you have any preconceptions that changed after researching "King's Ransom," in the way Los Angeles Kings and Edmonton Oilers reacted to the trade?

BERG: I think I had underestimated the tragic [component] to the film, and to the entire experience.

When you really start digging into this particular story and looking at the lives of the key players, and think about what might had been if Gretzky had not been traded, it's hard to look at the underlying regret for all of these players. It's part of their souls at this point.

I think I underestimated how much Wayne might think about what could have been if he could have kept that team together up in Edmonton. Maybe that team could have gone on to become one of the most dominant sports teams in history. They could have potentially won 10 Stanley Cups.

I think it's something Wayne thinks about, more than I imagined.

Berg also said that he was proud to document the "horrendous hairstyles" on both sides of the border during the Gretzky trade. "At that particular time, the mullet was really in the height of its popularity."

"Kings Ransom" isn't, as Colby Cosh also noted, a revelatory experience for hockey fans who remember the Gretzky trade. But Berg's right that it captures the palpable regret for all involved, especially for The Great One.

Related: When Hockey and Hollywood Collide