The Official 2014 Stanley Cup Playoffs Thread

[Suburban Rhythm]

Originally Posted by stevew

Funny how quiet the Pens bandwagon is on Facebook today.

I prefer quiet to panic.

Game 1, while I was on a plane, was hilarious. Row across from me was a kid, about 13, following on his laptop. When Columbus went up 3-1, the dad looked at the laptop..."Christ...Fleury sucks!"

No replays. No descriptions. Just automatically knew, 3-1, has to be Fleury's fault.

[claphamsa]

was that Columbus' first ever playoff victory? They were talking about it when my DVR cut off....

[Draft Dodger]

it was

[claphamsa]

3 games for seabrook...

[MizzouRah]

Originally Posted by claphamsa

3 games for seabrook...

Complete BS.

[weegeebored]

Originally Posted by MizzouRah

Complete BS.

So was this. Jonathan Toews suffers bloody face after hit against boards | Tireball NHL News, Rumors and Opinions

[claphamsa]

Originally Posted by weegeebored

So was this. Jonathan Toews suffers bloody face after hit against boards | Tireball NHL News, Rumors and Opinions

why? he never left his feet, and he hit with his shoulder. completely legal.

[The Jackal]

Hooray for stealing a game at MSG

Maybe don't give up so many scoring chances at home mmkay

[MizzouRah]

Originally Posted by claphamsa

why? he never left his feet, and he hit with his shoulder. completely legal.

Exactly..

[DaddyTorgo]

[EagleFan]

Originally Posted by weegeebored

So was this. Jonathan Toews suffers bloody face after hit against boards | Tireball NHL News, Rumors and Opinions

Karma for trash talking someone that was concussed?

[weegeebored]

Originally Posted by EagleFan

Karma for trash talking someone that was concussed?

Um...Karma doesn't work backwards, does it? That hit was from Thursday's game.

[weegeebored]

Originally Posted by claphamsa

why? he never left his feet, and he hit with his shoulder. completely legal.

Shoulder to the head -- not legal.

[Draft Dodger]

I find it hard to understand how anyone could consider that a clean or legal hit

[kingfc22]

13 goals in 2 games. Sweet.

[bronconick]

Now they just need to figure out how to win a game in LA

[Suburban Rhythm]

Originally Posted by weegeebored

Shoulder to the head -- not legal.

It's not illegal either, if head is principal point of contact. Collateral damage in the NHL world.

Besides, even if it were illegal, would you really expect the NHL to get it right?

[Dr. Sak]

It isn't legal to spear someone in the balls with your stick, but it will only cost you a minimal fine if you do so.

[Logan]

Originally Posted by Dr. Sak

It isn't legal to spear someone in the balls with your stick, but it will only cost you a minimal fine if you do so.

And only 20% of what you pay for grabbing your own balls!

[britrock88]

The Seabrook hit is the kind that should draw a 1:1 penalty--the offender stays out for as long as the victim.

[Suburban Rhythm]

Originally Posted by Dr. Sak

It isn't legal to spear someone in the balls with your stick, but it will only cost you a minimal fine if you do so.

But he's only done it three time by his own admission. Cut the guy a break!

[MizzouRah]

Originally Posted by britrock88

The Seabrook hit is the kind that should draw a 1:1 penalty--the offender stays out for as long as the victim.

They were talking about that today on the radio.. I like it. A guy is out for say, two months, so is the player who gave the illegal hit.

They also said, do away with the instigator penalty.. have the other teams tough guy take care of it without fear of an instigator penalty.

[TroyF]

Originally Posted by MizzouRah

They were talking about that today on the radio.. I like it. A guy is out for say, two months, so is the player who gave the illegal hit.

They also said, do away with the instigator penalty.. have the other teams tough guy take care of it without fear of an instigator penalty.

I hate it for a lot of reasons.

1) I know it's this way in life, but I'm tired of the "you get punished based on the result of your actions, not your actions garbage" Let us say we have a game where the Seabrook hit happens, but then St. Louis decides to get cheap and hits Kane dirty driving him back into the boards. Kane gets lucky, he falls just perfect and ends up barely being hurt. Two actions that were the same thing and different suspensions.

2) It would be ridiculously easy for teams to play the system with that type of rule. In the Blues case, the guy is a critical player and will come back as quickly as possible. What happens if Seabrook hits a fourth line scrub and this rule was in place? You think the Blues are going to let that guy come back for the duration of the series? People usually respond the league could stop that, but could they? A guy says his head hurts and he's dizzy, do you think the NHL takes a chance on him coming back?


The fix for cheap hits is longer suspensions, regardless of how badly the guy is hurt. The fact he had never been suspended makes me believe this should have been a 5 gamer and not more. Instead, he gets 3. Too short.

[Suburban Rhythm]

Originally Posted by MizzouRah

They were talking about that today on the radio.. I like it. A guy is out for say, two months, so is the player who gave the illegal hit.

They also said, do away with the instigator penalty.. have the other teams tough guy take care of it without fear of an instigator penalty.

I think this is great in theory, poor in practice

What's stopping some plug called up from the AHL from taking out Backes in the same manner? Chicago couldn't care less about losing him.

And the instigator...dirty hits happened before, and have happened after. I point to Matt Cooke as the poster child. He didn't change anything until he got hit where he really hurt - his wallet. These guys don't fear retribution. They fear losing their jobs.

The instigator didn't stop Shawn Thornton early this year. If it's egregious enough, the tough guy isn't worried about instigator. He's doing what he needs to do to keep his job, too.

Until suspensions with real teeth (20+ games for these hits) happen, no reason for any of these guys to stop.

[Dr. Sak]

One other theory being floated around with suspensions in this manner is having the team being able to dress one less player for as long as that guy is suspended.

[claphamsa]

Originally Posted by britrock88

The Seabrook hit is the kind that should draw a 1:1 penalty--the offender stays out for as long as the victim.

I greatly dislike this. the NHL over punishes results not actions, why make it worse.

if you board someone you get suspended regardless of if they get hurt or not, same with knee on knee hits.

I also think the suspensions should be much higher.

[MizzouRah]

Originally Posted by TroyF

I hate it for a lot of reasons.

1) I know it's this way in life, but I'm tired of the "you get punished based on the result of your actions, not your actions garbage" Let us say we have a game where the Seabrook hit happens, but then St. Louis decides to get cheap and hits Kane dirty driving him back into the boards. Kane gets lucky, he falls just perfect and ends up barely being hurt. Two actions that were the same thing and different suspensions.

2) It would be ridiculously easy for teams to play the system with that type of rule. In the Blues case, the guy is a critical player and will come back as quickly as possible. What happens if Seabrook hits a fourth line scrub and this rule was in place? You think the Blues are going to let that guy come back for the duration of the series? People usually respond the league could stop that, but could they? A guy says his head hurts and he's dizzy, do you think the NHL takes a chance on him coming back?


The fix for cheap hits is longer suspensions, regardless of how badly the guy is hurt. The fact he had never been suspended makes me believe this should have been a 5 gamer and not more. Instead, he gets 3. Too short.

Excellent points..

1 - A cheap hit rarely results in someone not being hurt, hence is why it's a cheap hit. So if Kane isn't out, then the player gets a 5 min major and a game ejection. Next game is Kane is back, then the player is also back.

2 - very good points.. I would still argue if the player is ruled by the NHL of an illegal hit, then he will have to deal with the penalty, even if that means the team sits out a 4th liner due to "dizziness" and the other team loses a top player who decided to go one step further with a dirty (illegal) hit. It would be up to the NHL to determine that. Would cut down big time on those types of hits.

I agree with the 5 games though (I'd say for the playoffs you are out the rest of the series).. but if Backes is out a month and this is the regular season, it doesn't make much sense to me for the player not to be out a month.

These types of hits need to stop, someone is going to get killed or live off liquid food for the rest of their lives. I know the NHL is trying to handle these hits, but they need to ramp it up a bit imho.

[DaddyTorgo]

Originally Posted by MizzouRah

Excellent points..

1 - A cheap hit rarely results in someone not being hurt, hence is why it's a cheap hit. So if Kane isn't out, then the player gets a 5 min major and a game ejection. Next game is Kane is back, then the player is also back.

2 - very good points.. I would still argue if the player is ruled by the NHL of an illegal hit, then he will have to deal with the penalty, even if that means the team sits out a 4th liner due to "dizziness" and the other team loses a top player who decided to go one step further with a dirty (illegal) hit. It would be up to the NHL to determine that. Would cut down big time on those types of hits.

I agree with the 5 games though (I'd say for the playoffs you are out the rest of the series).. but if Backes is out a month and this is the regular season, it doesn't make much sense to me for the player not to be out a month.

These types of hits need to stop, someone is going to get killed or live off liquid food for the rest of their lives. I know the NHL is trying to handle these hits, but they need to ramp it up a bit imho.

To fix the "sitting a 4th liner" or "targeting a star" type thing, why not make it salary-cap based? It's not perfect (there are over/under paid guys), but it'd take about 85% of that abuse out I'd think.

If you cheap-shot and knock out a guy with a $6m cap hit then your team's cap is reduced by $6m until he's back in for his team.

[MizzouRah]

Originally Posted by Suburban Rhythm

I think this is great in theory, poor in practice

What's stopping some plug called up from the AHL from taking out Backes in the same manner? Chicago couldn't care less about losing him.

And the instigator...dirty hits happened before, and have happened after. I point to Matt Cooke as the poster child. He didn't change anything until he got hit where he really hurt - his wallet. These guys don't fear retribution. They fear losing their jobs.

The instigator didn't stop Shawn Thornton early this year. If it's egregious enough, the tough guy isn't worried about instigator. He's doing what he needs to do to keep his job, too.

Until suspensions with real teeth (20+ games for these hits) happen, no reason for any of these guys to stop.

Good points too.. maybe a top liner player gets hurt then you sit a top liner player until the player returns.. but yes there are holes in this theory for sure. Like you said, maybe they increase fines to the player?

I like the minimum 20 game suspension though.. I mean 3-5 games don't mean squat in the regular season.. maybe playoff time they do.. but in the Seabrook - Backes case, it's almost an eye for an eye situation where Seabrook could potentially finish out the playoffs if the Hawks make it to the next round and Backes might be done for the season.

[claphamsa]

Originally Posted by DaddyTorgo

To fix the "sitting a 4th liner" or "targeting a star" type thing, why not make it salary-cap based? It's not perfect (there are over/under paid guys), but it'd take about 85% of that abuse out I'd think.

If you cheap-shot and knock out a guy with a $6m cap hit then your team's cap is reduced by $6m until he's back in for his team.

but how would you do that, say the capitals have someone cheap shot kane. they lose 6M in their cap... they only had100K leftover, so they CANT lose it.

[claphamsa]

I read a suggestion somewhere that said if you missed regular season games due to suspension, you missed the same number in the playoffs.

[DaddyTorgo]

Originally Posted by claphamsa

but how would you do that, say the capitals have someone cheap shot kane. they lose 6M in their cap... they only had100K leftover, so they CANT lose it.

Well not "lose" but "are unable to dress." Word choice. So it's not like they have to release somebody or whatever, just that they have to not-dress an equivalent amount of salary.

[Suburban Rhythm]

Originally Posted by MizzouRah

Good points too.. maybe a top liner player gets hurt then you sit a top liner player until the player returns.. but yes there are holes in this theory for sure. Like you said, maybe they increase fines to the player?

I like the minimum 20 game suspension though.. I mean 3-5 games don't mean squat in the regular season.. maybe playoff time they do.. but in the Seabrook - Backes case, it's almost an eye for an eye situation where Seabrook could potentially finish out the playoffs if the Hawks make it to the next round and Backes might be done for the season.

I'm not even talking increasing fines. Suspensions of 20+ games, with the next being 50 (or whatever) make you a less desirable player to all teams.

[TroyF]

Originally Posted by MizzouRah

Excellent points..

1 - A cheap hit rarely results in someone not being hurt, hence is why it's a cheap hit. So if Kane isn't out, then the player gets a 5 min major and a game ejection. Next game is Kane is back, then the player is also back.

2 - very good points.. I would still argue if the player is ruled by the NHL of an illegal hit, then he will have to deal with the penalty, even if that means the team sits out a 4th liner due to "dizziness" and the other team loses a top player who decided to go one step further with a dirty (illegal) hit. It would be up to the NHL to determine that. Would cut down big time on those types of hits.

I agree with the 5 games though (I'd say for the playoffs you are out the rest of the series).. but if Backes is out a month and this is the regular season, it doesn't make much sense to me for the player not to be out a month.

These types of hits need to stop, someone is going to get killed or live off liquid food for the rest of their lives. I know the NHL is trying to handle these hits, but they need to ramp it up a bit imho.

1) I'm sorry, but someone being hurt is not what makes a play cheap. There are plenty of knee on knee hits where the guy miraculously doesn't end up with a blown knee. It doesn't change the intent or cheapness of the act. Ditto for head shots. No, it's not even remotely fair that Player A gets to come back after 2 games and Player B sits the rest of the series because one guy happened to catch a break.

Do we do this with EVERY play? How many slashing calls get called a game? How many times does a hard slash break a bone? So now we have two of the same slashes and one guy gets 2 minutes, the other guy misses 30 games?

Sorry, I cannot get behind any rule that only deals with the end game not the intent.

2) As with #1, you are changing the penalties based on the players involved. You actually make it better to cheap shot a star because you know he'll come back as quick as he can.

Again, intent is what should be judged. Not end result. It doesn't matter because neither of us are every going to get what we want. I want longer suspension for garbage like that. (20 game minimums would be a good start). They aren't happening. I won't get it. You want this rule, and there is no way in hell any team will agree to it.

So we have what we have.

[Logan]

Originally Posted by claphamsa

but how would you do that, say the capitals have someone cheap shot kane. they lose 6M in their cap... they only had100K leftover, so they CANT lose it.

I guess the idea would be they would need to reduce their active player roster by the $6MM in salary? So if they're up against the cap, $6MM in salaries need to sit out.

Honestly I think these ideas go too far. These suspensions are insufficient and others are right when they say that some really bad hits have gone largely unpunished based on pure luck of the guy not actually getting hurt. The suspensions need to start in the double digits and I also like the idea of a team losing draft picks if they accrue a certain number of major suspensions over time. To take a look at my own team for a second, I was at a game last year when Rick Nash basically attacked a guy on the Panthers. I had a great view of it...as soon as I saw it, I thought it would be 10+ games before we saw him on the ice again, at least if suspensions were actually just. He got nothing and they put out a video as to why.

I'm really surprised this isn't something we see more of a push on from the NHLPA.

[Suburban Rhythm]

Originally Posted by Logan

I guess the idea would be they would need to reduce their active player roster by the $6MM in salary? So if they're up against the cap, $6MM in salaries need to sit out.

Honestly I think these ideas go too far. These suspensions are insufficient and others are right when they say that some really bad hits have gone largely unpunished based on pure luck of the guy not actually getting hurt. The suspensions need to start in the double digits and I also like the idea of a team losing draft picks if they accrue a certain number of major suspensions over time. To take a look at my own team for a second, I was at a game last year when Rick Nash basically attacked a guy on the Panthers. I had a great view of it...as soon as I saw it, I thought it would be 10+ games before we saw him on the ice again, at least if suspensions were actually just. He got nothing and they put out a video as to why.

I'm really surprised this isn't something we see more of a push on from the NHLPA.

I think the PA is the problem. One guy injured, and one guy gets off free, still two guys drawing a paycheck. One guy injured, one guy suspended, only one guy drawing a paycheck. That's their mentality, not the safety of ALL players.

[MizzouRah]

Originally Posted by TroyF

1) I'm sorry, but someone being hurt is not what makes a play cheap. There are plenty of knee on knee hits where the guy miraculously doesn't end up with a blown knee. It doesn't change the intent or cheapness of the act. Ditto for head shots. No, it's not even remotely fair that Player A gets to come back after 2 games and Player B sits the rest of the series because one guy happened to catch a break.

Do we do this with EVERY play? How many slashing calls get called a game? How many times does a hard slash break a bone? So now we have two of the same slashes and one guy gets 2 minutes, the other guy misses 30 games?

Sorry, I cannot get behind any rule that only deals with the end game not the intent.

2) As with #1, you are changing the penalties based on the players involved. You actually make it better to cheap shot a star because you know he'll come back as quick as he can.

Again, intent is what should be judged. Not end result. It doesn't matter because neither of us are every going to get what we want. I want longer suspension for garbage like that. (20 game minimums would be a good start). They aren't happening. I won't get it. You want this rule, and there is no way in hell any team will agree to it.

So we have what we have.

I never really said I want the rule.. I just like the premise of it. Obviously there are holes in it.. like SR said.. game suspensions of 20, then 50, etc.. big time suspensions for the intent of injuring someone.

[Suburban Rhythm]

Originally Posted by MizzouRah

I never really said I want the rule.. I just like the premise of it. Obviously there are holes in it.. like SR said.. game suspensions of 20, then 50, etc.. big time suspensions for the intent of injuring someone.

For me, it's almost amusing how inept the PA is at handling these things, and by connection, the NHL.

It's like nobody can think long range. Like lemmings, blindly following what the old guard did before them, and that group the old guard before them. Feels like nobody can think critically enough to see a (potential) short term blip caused by suspensions is infinitely smaller than the gains you make by cleaning up the product and attracting new fans.

The PA is worried about the 5-10 guys whom they represent and their portion of the 50% of HRR. But never think what that 50% could become, dollar-wise, if they made the game more attractive.

And the NHL for their part continues to trot out jackwads like Milbury, who while certainly more connected to the league than I could ever be, is only a detriment to selling the sport. More as much flak as Pierre takes, the guy is very knowledgeable and promotes opening the game to new fans.

[britrock88]

I'm glad we dipped in to the nature of punishment a little bit--action-based punishment versus consequentialism, so on--as we ramped up this discussion.

I think the clear thing is that as high as they may be, the stakes of competition are not worth the threats to health and livelihood that these hits inflict. So stiffer penalties, in whatever form, are the right idea.

[MizzouRah]

Originally Posted by Suburban Rhythm

For me, it's almost amusing how inept the PA is at handling these things, and by connection, the NHL.

It's like nobody can think long range. Like lemmings, blindly following what the old guard did before them, and that group the old guard before them. Feels like nobody can think critically enough to see a (potential) short term blip caused by suspensions is infinitely smaller than the gains you make by cleaning up the product and attracting new fans.

The PA is worried about the 5-10 guys whom they represent and their portion of the 50% of HRR. But never think what that 50% could become, dollar-wise, if they made the game more attractive.

And the NHL for their part continues to trot out jackwads like Milbury, who while certainly more connected to the league than I could ever be, is only a detriment to selling the sport. More as much flak as Pierre takes, the guy is very knowledgeable and promotes opening the game to new fans.

Agreed.. they need to clean it up, who's going to watch when a good % of the good players are out long term due to concussions caused by illegal hits.

Suspend someone half a season and see what happens.

[BlackJack]

What are they chanting in columbus - lets go something, - doesn't sound like blue jackets

[EagleFan]

Time for the league mandated Penguins power plays...

[EagleFan]

Originally Posted by BlackJack

What are they chanting in columbus - lets go something, - doesn't sound like blue jackets

I can't tell what they are saying.

[EagleFan]

Just Jackets maybe?

[MizzouRah]

Well fck me... one cheesy goal.

Like I've said, you don't need a stud goalie.. what you do need is guys that can FCKING SCORE!

[henry296]

Originally Posted by EagleFan

I can't tell what they are saying.

I think it is C-B-J. At least one Pittsburgh writer said that what they were saying after the goals.

[The Jackal]

Originally Posted by EagleFan

Time for the league mandated Penguins power plays...

Man were there 2 or 3 terrible penalty calls in that game. You'd think it was the Flyers...

[claphamsa]

so how long should and will cooke be suspended? I say 50 but hell only get 20.

[Suburban Rhythm]

Originally Posted by claphamsa

so how long should and will cooke be suspended? I say 50 but hell only get 20.

He's not even going to get 20. I'll be shocked if it's more than 10.

[bronconick]

Torres got 3-6 game (2nd round) last year. Something like that, I'd guess.