User Comments, Suggestions, or Complaints | Privacy Policy | Terms of Service | Advertising
|
Demarini, Easton and TPX Baseball Bats
|
AllianceTickets.com has cheap MLB Tickets. Get all your Colorado Rockies Tickets, Seattle Mariners Tickets, San Francisco Giants Tickets and all your favorite baseball tickets here. We also carry cheap Denver Broncos Tickets, Seattle Seahawks Tickets and Denver Nuggets Tickets. |
For wholesale prices on baseball gifts and equipment, check these stores out! |
Page rendered in 0.7952 seconds
53 querie(s) executed
Reader Comments and Retorts
Go to end of page
Statements posted here are those of our readers and do not represent the BaseballThinkFactory. Names are provided by the poster and are not verified. We ask that posters follow our submission policy. Please report any inappropriate comments.
So I guess this is happening for reals now. Four divisions, no conferences. (Or I guess they are calling it 4 conferences, no divisions).
Names I made up, and the lists within the division have no meaning, just my interpretation of how they got there.
-Snowbird Conference (7 teams)
Boston, Buffalo
Montreal, Ottawa, Toronto
Tampa, Florida
NYC-Based-Rivalry-Maintenance Conference (7 teams)
NY Islanders, NY Rangers, NJ Devils
Pittsburgh, Philadelphia, Washington
Carolina
Norris Conference (8 teams)
Chicago, Detroit, St. Louis, Minnesota, Winnipeg
Dallas, Nashville, Columbus
Latenight Conference (8 teams)
San Jose, Anaheim, Los Angeles, Phoenix
Vancouver, Calgary, Edmonton
Colorado
It's probably better than any other preposed realignment we've seen, but I think I'd prefer a less drastic change. Division playoffs will be hate generators, which is cool, but I'm going to be sick of playing the Red Wings in the first or second round every year for the next decade (...hopefully). The uneven division sizes are obviously a big downside as well, especially if they keep an east/west stanley cup format. And I liked having the conference-wide playoff races rather than the divisional format used in every other sport I follow. Oh well.
also, i would have at least thought of splitting the rangers and the islanders, so that you'd actually have some variety in nyc w/r/t opponents.
Oh well.
That makes absolutely no sense in a geographical re-alignment.
put the islanders in the north, along with detroit, then shift the florida teams to the atlantic.
-Snowbird Conference (7 teams)
NY Islanders, Boston, Buffalo
Montreal, Ottawa, Toronto
Detroit
NYC-Based-Rivalry-Maintenance Conference (8 teams)
NY Rangers, NJ Devils
Pittsburgh, Philadelphia, Washington
Carolina, Tampa, Florida
Norris Conference (7 teams)
Chicago, St. Louis, Minnesota, Winnipeg
Dallas, Nashville, Columbus
Latenight Conference (8 teams)
San Jose, Anaheim, Los Angeles, Phoenix
Vancouver, Calgary, Edmonton
Colorado
the "norris" "conference" would be a bit weak, but hopefully that would be more of a cyclical thing than a year-in/year-out thing.
i think this actually makes more sense since you're not pairing the florida teams with the canadia teams, and you're restoring some of the original 6 rivalries by putting toronto, montreal, boston and detroit in the same "conference"
The hockey establishment and media is determined to sweep this under the rug. I suspect what will do them in is an ex-enforcer launching a class action lawsuit and winning an ungodly sum of money.
Phoenix is going to Quebec in the next year or two, which will make that conference eight.
Then it's all set for expansion. Yes, I know, but owners love that free money. Seattle and Kansas City here we come!
Restoring Wings rivalries out east by ending the Wings/Hawks rivalry is, well, stupid. It's probably not ideal to have one conference/division over-original-sixed, or more-so I should say.
BTW, how about Jonathan Toews? It's not a hard argument to make that he's the best/most valuable/whatever player in hockey.
NYTimes had a pretty lengthy article about Boogaard and the diagnosis.
My one disappointment is that given the importance of in-conference games I wish there were more of them. The two "east" conferences will both play more games out of conference than in conference which I think is wrong.
i think that'll be a harder case to win than you might expect. the damage to boogaard's brain started in the CHL, which isn't really under the NHL's umbrella. it could be argued that even if he had retired instead of making his NHL debut, the CTE would still be an issue due to the blows he'd taken in juniors.
i think it'd be pretty cool to rekindle the rivalries between detroit and the other sixers, but i could see how someone might not.
this could just be me, but with the unbalanced schedule, i find some of these decades-old rivalries to be kind of stale. playing the rangers and the penguins and the devils 6 times a year just isn't very exciting going into the 8th year that we've been doing it.
i'd like to see chicago. i'd like to see vancouver, and the kings, and the blues, and the sharks.
this realignment doubles down on the idea that familiarity breeds contempt, but i'd like to see some new rivalries form instead of just feeding these old ones into the grinder. and that is just exactly the opposite of the way i'm feeling about this.
Basically Phoenix is just sitting there for now, ready to move to one of the 7 team divisions once it is finally sold and moved. With the 4 divisions this was the only way.
Expansion is the last thing the NHL needs. Instead it needs to contract Phoenix and Florida.
agree in respect to the CTE...I mean, they don't know all that much about how it progresses.
However, if you read the Times article, there's plenty of room for a lawsuit regarding painkiller prescriptions. Supposedly:
The Panthers aren't going anywhere because they make bank running the arena. Besides, they average 15k like clockwork. Not great, but if you were going to contract a team on merit it would be the Islanders (along with the Coyotes).
I've been trying to put together some high level stats since we're nearly a third of the way through the season, but I'm having trouble summarizing them.
Looks like the Rangers, Maple Leafs and Wild are mostly smoke and mirrors. At 5v5, the Rangers have a team shooting percentage 2.4 SD over the mean!, and a save percentage 1.2SD up, while being a bottom-5 possession team. Minnesota is pretty clearly relying on unsustainable goaltending, 1.6 SD+, bottom 3 possession. Maple Leafs likewise have unsustainably high shooting numbers, especially on the power play.
Boston looks like a very good team, but not the unbeatable juggernaut that they appear to be right now. They're the only team with off-the-charts shooting and save numbers at 5v5, off the chart shooting numbers on the powerplay, and off the chart save numbers on the kill. Then again, Tim Thomas is really ####### good, so they might be less lucky than your average team with those numbers.
St. Louis and Florida look like the improvement is real.
Fenwick Ratios
While Score Tied: 2nd!
While Score Close: 4th
Even Strength
Shots For: 6th
Shots Against: 4th!
Shooting Percentage: 12th
Save Percentage: 26th
Penalty Kill
Opportunities Given: 9th
Shots Against: 27th (…)
Save Percentage: 27th (…)
Power Play
Opportunities Drawn: 13th
Shots For: 4th
Shooting Percentage: 19th
Misc
Hits: 24th
Blocked Shots: 9th?!
Faceoff Percentage: 5th
Takeaways: 2nd
If you're Matt Hackett you come in to face 6 more shots in the next 3 minutes, then hold on to stop 28 more over the rest of the game while your team scores 2 to come back and win. Sheesh.
Then get rid of the Blue Jackets. Nobody cares about these franchises.
That's not even the best rookie goalie story of the day. That would be Mike Murphy, who came in, didn't give up a goal and got the loss.
One of the things that the Bruins have going for them is health. They have basically rolled out the same 20 every night (at least the ones who
remember to set their alarm clock) which is a big help. Like your point about Thomas there is a "luck is the residue of design" aspect to that as they roll four lines and six defensemen regularly so they avoid a bit of wear and tear.
My one fear is that as the season goes on they will wear down. They had the deep run in the playoffs last year of course and they are a physical team to begin with who now are playign with a target on their backs.
Semi-related, the atmosphere in Winnipeg last night was sensational. I don't know if the Stanley Cup champs is what generated that or that is how the fans have been typically but it was a loud and enthusiastic building. A lot of fun to watch.
he's still really ####### good.
the flyers have 37 points, and are alone at the top of the eastern conference.
claude giroux is on pace for 48 goals and 111 points.
scott hartnell on pace for 39 goals.
the team as a whole has 7 players on pace to put up 50 points (giroux, hartnell, jagr, briere, voracek, timonen, read), and 12 on pace for 30 (van riemsdyk, talbot, pronger, carle, simmonds).
just in the last 4 games, they've come back from (2) 3-0 deficits, and won, and they've jumped to (2) 3-0 leads, and won. 4 games, 8 points, no pronger.
*he actually was pretty awful to start the season, too. 2 points (both assists) the first 7 games of the season, and then, for some reason, he forrest gump'd his way onto the wing of jagr and giroux, and he exploded for 22 points in his next 20 games.
i mean, you'd expect someone who plays on a line with jagr and giroux to produce, but there's a difference between expecting it and getting it, and you gotta give hartnell at least some credit for actually putting the puck in the back of the net.
Both are also shooting at a 20% clip, compared to Giroux's 13% and Hartnell's 12% over the last 3 years. I don't doubt that Giroux has elevated his game, but the safe bet would be the way under on either maintaining that scoring rate for the season.
as for hartnell, as i said, he's been inconsistent. him slowing down would be the expectation, but he is capable of scoring in bunches, so i wouldn't put 40 goals out of his reach, and especially not if he stays on the line he's on.
Not going to happen. And I'm a Hartnell fan.
And every time I see you post, it's fanboyism.
And just so you know, I enjoyed them beating the ####### Sabres and then the ####### Penguins on back to back nights. That was pretty sweet.
You've lost me. Not sure what this has to do with anything we are talking about.
my "fanboyism" has actually come up several times in several places before. part of it is that i enjoy watching the teams i root for. part of it is that i focus more on individual player development than i do on the final score of individual games. a large part of it is probably linked to the fact that i'm a huge wrestling fan, and i kind of enjoy riling people up with my aggressive "fanboyism"**.
**seriously. with the phillies run last year, i got so deep under people's skin that there were other team's fans with no connection whatsoever to the phillies that had their years made simply because the phillies got knocked out in the first round.
The NHL should reclaim the tradition of naming divisions and conferences after past greats.
The Orr, Lemieux, Howe and Gretzky Conferences sound good to me.
Plus, with all of the changes, I'd love to see the semi-finals re-seeded based on best record. That sets up the possibility of the two best teams meeting in the finals (or, conversely, two upsets and neither of the best teams- but those are the chances you take).
I kind of would like him to miss more time, just to see if it has a noticeable impact on the Bruins' goal-prevention. Unfortunately tonight's game is against the Kings, who make every defense look like an unstoppable juggernaut.
I think it would have to have some impact. If it didn't then I think the importance of a defensman's defense is vastly overrated since he is as good as it gets.
i mean, i'm not a huge hockey fan, so it may be that what i'm advocating here is the equivalent to a non-baseball fan saying there are too many games for the season to matter, but it annoys me to see the standings so tightly packed when the difference in the quality of the teams is actually much greater.
i'll take it.
it could just be me, but i think the breakout star was unquestionably ilya bryzgalov.
Sub in "Clark" for one of those ham and eggers and I'm on board.
OT certainly is more open than it used to be, but I don't recall it being a problem for me.
I will say I think my ideal would be 3 points for a win, 1 for a tie. 5 or 10 minute 4 on 4 OT.
EDIT: Re: Pessimism and Optimism as a fan. I lean towards pessimism, because I'm a generally pessimistic guy, plus it's always fun to be pleasantly surprised. Actually I'd say "cautious optimism" is a better descrption. Fans who are always certain that their team is the best drive me nuts, but so do fans who get on people for having hope. My default setting (which is ideally suited to the current incarnation of the Leafs) is that my team probably isn't good enough to make the playoffs, but if enough things go right (like a flukey hot start) they've got a chance.
Some selections picked at random. I did wingers and centres separately. Obviously if it's just forwards as a group Lemieux is on the first line. I think I might actually take the forward group on team 9 over the 7s.
Team 50
Cristobel Huet
Jaroslav Modry
Joe Reekie
Shayne Corson
Jason Allison
Murray Craven
Team 40
Byron Dafoe
Craig Ludwig
Bill Houler
Shawn McEachren
Olli Jokinen
Adam Graves
Team 30
Jocelyn Thibault
Adam Foote
Ulf Samuelsson
Tomas Sandstrom
Henrik Sedin
Geoff Sanderson
Team 9
Sean Burke
Eric Desjardins
Kevin Hatcher
Pavel Bure
Sergei Fedorov
Petr Bondra
Team 7
Tomas Vokoun
Sergei Gonchar
Rob Blake
Paul Kariya
Mats Sundin
Theo Fleury
Team 2
Patrick Roy
Paul Coffey
Al MacInnis
Brett Hull
Mario Lemieux
Mark Messier
Team 1
Martin Brodeur
Ray Bourque
Nik Lidstrom
Jaromir Jagr
Wayne Gretzky
Teemu Selanne
and now couturier just got hit in the side of the head by a slapshot.
yeah, this game is not going very well.
flyers players diagnosed with a concussion so far this season:
pronger
giroux
schenn
read
van riemsdyk
and now, danny briere.
that is...not good.
Not sure why they felt the need to trade Carter. It's like they didn't want to deal Nash but felt they had to do *something* just because.
up until he was traded, i was a huge fan of jeff carter. i thought he was really hurt by being compared to the perception of richards, when, (at least) in my opinion, by the end of their run here, he was a much more competent 2 way player than richards was. carter was relied upon to take defensive zone draws to a much greater extent than richards, and he really became a very reliable defensive forward, both in his own zone and in transition.
anyway, that was up until he was traded. the tantrum he threw after being traded to columbus, and him completely laying down once getting there have kinda soured me on him.
but still, i'm interested to see what they can do in LA. they both seemed pretty shaken by getting traded, so hopefully they'll both get a kick now that they're reunited.
i'm watching the mike richards one.
i'm really just completely stunned at how laid back he is. i mean, i don't expect an athlete to live and breathe his sport 24/7/365, but it seems like hockey is just completely off his radar when he's not at the rink. there's just no drive in him at this point.
also, i absolutely love how the receptionist at AM570 had absolutely no idea who he was when he went to the studio to be interviewed.
Martin Brodeur
Marty Brodeur is the Jack Morris of goalies. Pedro Hasek is a clear number 1, unless you're going with a career-value/stanley cup combo rating system (and that should give you Roy).
I can imagine a system that cared a lot about Cups giving you Sawchuk or Plante instead of Roy, the only problems with that being that giving lots of credit for team playoff success is dumb and also that goalie play has changed a ton since the 50s.
I don't see why changes in styles of play matters. Technique and tactics in all sports has evolved over the years. It wasn't like either of those two guys were big fat guys who just stood there and deflected pucks wide of the net; Plante in particular invented the type of roving third defenseman goalie that the NHL changed the rules to eliminate while Sawchuk was at times playing like Hasek except without the benefit of a mask.
Giving it to Plante because he was lucky enough to be teammates with (inhales) Maurice Richard, Jean Beliveau, Doug Harvey, Dickie Moore, Bernie Geoffrion, Henri Richard, Tom Johnson, JG Talbot and therefore collect RINGZZZZ is dumb, but he deserves his share of the credit as a truly great goaltender. Same with Sawchuk.
ilya bryzgalov has shutouts in 3 of the last 4 games, and hasn't allowed a goal in his last 136 minutes. he just beat toronto 1-0 in a shootout, which is remarkable for 2 reasons:
1, the flyers actually won a shootout (honestly, i can really only remember 1 time they've actually come out on top, and it was the 82nd game of the 2009 season where they stoned the rangers in a win-and-in game).
and 2, the flyers only had 3 NHL caliber defensemen in the lineup. pronger was out, timonen was out, meszaros was out, kubina was out. they dressed gustafsson (who's played all of 25 NHL games), lilja (who's really past the point where he's useful) and some 21 year old called manning, who was playing in only his 2nd NHL game.
he was just really, really good.
Oh come on. They won a SO 2 weeks ago.
They are real (unfortunately), and they could go deep.
Sucks to look in the mirror, huh.
About two weeks ago, I was looking at minor penalties since the lockout, and on a bar chart the Flyers bar is like dropping the Sears Tower in Kansas.
Even the Flyers were penalized less than the least penalized team immediately after the lockout.
He didn't charge, he didn't blind side him, he didn't jump, he didn't hit him with an elbow, he didn't target his head, he didn't hit him from behind, he didn't hit him near the boards, he didn't hit him after he passed the puck, he didn't hit him before he got the puck, he didn't hit him after the whistle, he didn't hit him while he was tied up with someone else, he didn't hit him while chasing an icing, he didn't slew-foot him, he didn't use his stick, he didn't cross-check him...
And yet everyone on the Flyers lost their minds when it happened.
Replace "Penguins" with "Canadiens" and you get the exact way Bruin fans felt last April heading into the first round series with Montreal. I really thought a series with Montreal would suck the energy out of the Bruins and leave them ripe for the picking in the next round. I was wrong.
As for yesterday I only saw the incident(s) in highlight form but it looked to me like Crosby really initiated things with his little Peter Forsberg memorial cheap shot on one of the Flyers. He didn't pop the guy or anything but if he wants to give those little chippy shots he has to be ready to take a pop in response. I agree with RTG that the hit on Briere was just a good old fashioned clean hit.
I'm excited because the Bruins clinched the division last night. I wouldn't mind seeing Tim Thomas take the next few games off, maybe a couple of periods in the last game, but rest him up.
It was a legal hit but let's not act like this is an isolated incident. Teams losing their #### over good clean hits happens way too much these days. I'm not opposed to the league handing out some post-game discipline over it.
Buffalo really dicked the dog by losing to the damn Maple Leafs. Losing 3 defensemen, including the top 2, in consecutive games probably didn't help.
I think you've got it backwards. Braden Schenn cross-checked Crosby on the way to the bench, which infuriated the Penguins.
Teams losing their #### over good clean hits happens way too much these days. I'm not opposed to the league handing out some post-game discipline over it.
Agreed. I hate how every team in the league handles a big hit as an act of war.
Usually there is some aspect of the trigger-hits that might possibly be construed as "dirty".
This is the first one in a while that was as perfect as it gets.
On the highlights I saw they showed Crosby take his little swipe (which was the weakest hit of the bunch) THEN Schenn hammer Crosby. If that's not the sequence, that's just wrong.
Which was retaliation for Crosby's slash earlier in the game.
Vitale had earlier injured Grossman, so part of it was also message sending for the playoffs. That part I don't have a problem with, but I am biased.
I must have missed that.
Anything that shuts him up is fine by me.
He slashed Schenn pretty hard, broke his own stick. Even the NBC announcers thought it was a penalty, and of course they're loathe to ever criticize the Golden Boy.
hammer?
it's a sore subject. so far this year, the list of flyers who've missed games due to head injuries includes pronger, van riemsdyk, schenn, briere, giroux, voracek, couturier, and matt read. the team is just on edge about this stuff.
i am kind of conflicted about this kind of thing right now. with all of the stuff that's come out about the consequences that concussions have later in life--in football and wrestling, in addition to hockey--my appetite for these kinds of plays has been greatly diminished. on the one hand, it was a "clean" hit, and i disagree with laviolette saying that the guy shouldn't have been on the ice. the game was decided, and that really is a situation where 4th liners should see the ice.
but the game was decided, and the hit was dangerous and wholly unnecessary. it may have been clean, but if zac rinaldo takes that exact same run at sidney crosby in his first shift this saturday, i don't think there's any doubt he'd be gone for the game, and likely the playoffs as well. this is the kind of thing where you treat others the way you expect to be treated yourself, and if the penguins sing the praises of that kind of hit, well, they probably shouldn't expect crosby to be on the ice for very much longer.
Briere wasn't hit in the head.
What? No chance. It was a clean hit, shoulder to chest. Briere's head was never touched.
but the game was decided, and the hit was dangerous and wholly unnecessary.
How was it dangerous?
and if the penguins sing the praises of that kind of hit, well, they probably shouldn't expect crosby to be on the ice for very much longer.
That could be the dumbest thing I've seen you write in this discussion.
So clean checks should be retaliated with deliberate attempts to injure?
Even the Flyers were penalized less than the least penalized team immediately after the lockout.
Am I reading that correctly? The Hawks are the least penalized team in the NHL this year? I have to say I find that a bit surprising -- it seems like they take at least one Too Many Men per game (although the chart seems to say bench minors aren't included, so maybe that skews the chart a little).
Also a shame about Steve Montador, ehh? Comes back after missing several games due to a concussion, and first game back takes a head shot.
Regarding the Briere hit, I'll echo 1283 in saying it looked pretty clean -- guy didn't seem to leave his feet, and it looked like he got Briere square in the chest.
it was an unnecessary hit that gave the penguins no strategic advantage, other than its potential (realized potential, as it turns out) to injure an opposing player. clean hit or not, i don't think it's unreasonable to say that the intent behind this hit was to injure danny briere--to send a message.
i'm not an "eye for an eye" guy...not in sports, anyway. i'm just saying the hit should not have happened. you people are caught up on the mechanics of the hit itself, but that misses the point. the hit did nothing to affect the result of the game, it put a player on the DL (so to speak), it caused multiple players to be ejected and fined (though i don't think there's been a suspension). it did not need to happen.
Are we also going to penalize hurt feelings? There was nothing wrong with that hit.
Where they don't wear helmets. I'm not saying that helmets solve everything, but comparing basketball to hockey in this instance is a huge stretch.
I'm not sure about today, but as of two weeks ago they were the least penalized, by a fair bit. They've been in the bottom-3 of penalties for the last couple of years, too, so not an outlier. It makes sense to me, they engage in relatively little shenanigans (Canucks games excepted). This year they've been even cleaner than usual, because the PK is so terrible they can't afford to take penalties. On the topic, it annoys the #### out of me when people complain about PIM not balancing out for two teams, when it is extremely clear that there is a talent to not taking penalties. They shouldn't balance out.
Unlike the last few years, the Blackhawks actually in the top 10 in fights this year, though. Thanks mostly to Bollig trying to stay in the league.
Edit: looking it up, they still have the fewest minors, two fewer than the Sharks. They have ten bench minors, tied for fourth with five other teams, vs. an average of 7.5. Philly has 30 more minors than the next most penalized team.
and yes, i am evolving on this. there was a time when i'd have shrugged my shoulders and said "rub some dirt on it" or "we damn well better get him back the next time", but again, with all of the recent research into the long-term effects of concussions, i just think someone needs to step in when things like this happen, and say "enough". there has to be a mutual respect between players, and part of that is letting up in a situation like this, so that when the roles are reversed, you'll get the same benefit.
The hit in yesterday's game wasn't a "check" as that term was used until very recently.
(*) Particularly since the list of stars and near-stars with head injuries is absurdly long.
But it is also part of the culture that needs to change. Hitting should be done to create and deny space, not just for the sake of it. That hit wasn't to seperate Briere from the puck in a meaningful way, just to put him down.
I'm sure I'll get #### for this, but I also don't understand why "finishing your check" is still legal. It's blatant interference by the standard, and it usually results in hard contact with the boards. I get that it is required to keep the hitter from being way behind the play after the check is completed...but if a check takes you out of position, why is it a good play?
Because fans like it. Hockey (and football) are in a tough spot right now. Both sports are dealing with twin issues that are in direct opposition to each other;
- fans like a certain amount of violence
- violence is unsafe
I love a good, hard checking hockey game. As a fan I want to see guys "finishing their checks" in part because I enjoy the violence. Additionally, while you are right that it takes the player out of position briefly if it is done correctly the player he hits is out of position longer. The threat of the hit can also force the player to move the puck quicker than he wants to resulting in turnovers.
to put it as simply as i can, the difference between high level amateur wrestling, and WWE style professional wrestling, is that, when you're competing as an amateur wrestler, your aim is to compete at as high a level as possible, meaning that when you are not healthy (not necessarily due to head trauma, it could just be that you tweaked your knee), you rest, so that the next time you compete, you do so as a healthier athlete.
but with professional wrestling, and with hockey, and with american football, the culture is such that you are expected to play through the pain, and that gets to the cocktail.
when you add physical sports to a culture of playing through the pain, you get substance abuse issues. not always, i know that (and the substances that are abused are not necessarily illegal ones, it could just be alcohol), but when you hear about an athlete committing suicide, or having early-onset dementia, or depression, or...i don't even want to bring up that other one, this is the root cause-
when you add head trauma to physical sports, to a culture of playing through the pain and put substance abuse issues on top of that, you get major psychological disorders.
this is not just a hockey thing. it's showing up in other places (i think there have been somewhere around 50 suicides of professional wrestlers under the age of 50 since the turn of the century), but i think a lot of people are missing the impact that the culture of sports itself has in creating these dangerous psychological issues.
Is this some kind of joke?
Open ice hits were just as common in the 1980s/90s as they are now.
I have old NHL-produced "Hockey's Hardest Hitters" videos where guys like Geoff Courtnall and Al Iafrate were getting demolished by open ice hits from Scott Stevens and Kevin Hatcher.
In fact, it was more common to see shoulder/forearm shots to the head as part of the hit than not.
The famous Luke Richardson hit on Tony Granato that knocked him out was when Richardson dropped his shoulder under Granato's chin. It was definitely a targeted hit to the head, but back in the days that was okay because it wasn't an elbow or a stick.
The only reason everyone is making a bigger deal about them now is because the recipients are (rightly) being told that if they have had their "bell rung", they need to take it easy because people have (correctly) identified further issues down the road.
the hit did nothing to affect the result of the game, it put a player on the DL (so to speak), it caused multiple players to be ejected and fined (though i don't think there's been a suspension).
The hit did not cause the suspension/ejections. The retaliation by the Flyers was their act only.
That's like saying the Flyers 6th goal was the cause of the whole issue because it angered the Penguins, which led to the hit.
And when should players not hit other players? Is it part of the same unwritten rule book about running up the score in baseball, or trying hard late in the game in basketball?
If Vitale isn't allowed to hit him there, then Briere has to promise not to continue moving the puck forward towards the Penguins' end of the ice. If Briere had any intention of trying to create a scoring chance, than a simple body check should be allowed to stop him from doing that.
Edit:
I can't view the video, but this one is labeled with the same title as one of my old VCR tapes.
Hockey's Hardest Hitters
Fair enough, I stopped watching after the first replay because it isn't analogous to me.
I agree with post 1393 and 1395.
Depending on his age, it's possible he's talking before that. The 90's were definitely full of killing blow hits, the 80's less so. The 70's were an embarassment of violence (to the exclusion of actual game playing), and while far dirtier in general didn't see as much of the head-hunting IMO. Before that, players rarely wore helmets and shoulder pads were barely anything, so there wasn't nearly the same level of violence to hitting. You'd be more likely to #### up your shoulder than anything if you leaped at someone's head.
i think people are too caught up on the first question, and are not nearly as attentive to the 2nd and 3rd ones. the vitale hit was dangerous, and it was unnecessary, and legal or not, it's the kind of thing that hockey would be better without.
But would you say the same thing if Rinaldo did it to Malkin?
You must be Registered and Logged In to post comments.
<< Back to main