2009-10 NHL Thread

I'm shocked big tough guys are afraid of a two-minute minor.

 

you really think's it's the 2 minute minor? accumulated instigators and misconducts result in suspensions. That 2 minute minor can also cost you a game. Why protect the cheap shot artists?

 

An instigating penalty is worth two and 10, in addition to the five for fighting.

If you pick a fight with someone who doesn't fight back, they may not be penalized at all - not even for doing what got you pissed off at them in the first place - and you may have just given the other guy's team a seven-minute power play.

You also run the risk of getting an aggressor penalty, which is an automatic game misconduct.

Accumulated instigator and aggressor penalties also get you suspended. Is it worth it?

 

I've never been a fan of the instigator penalty but these days it's not so much that players aren't willing to stick up for their teammates, it's they don't pick their spot properly, lately it seems like you can't hit a guy clean or otherwise without having someone come over and try to fight you, then half the time when a head shot is delivered there is no one is there to drop the gloves. They just have to pick their spots better and when it comes for a guy to pay the piper, make sure the guy who is doling out the punishment can actually fight, not just some grinder who who is trying to stick up for his teammate.

 

I hate that players have to answer for clean hits and that should be penalized appropriately.

 

More worth it than seeing one of your best players carted off on a backboard while the perpetrator just stands there watching.

 

Until the NHL's general managers actually change the rules, rather than whine about changing the rules like they do, a head shot is ostensibly a clean hit if it's delivered with the shoulder as opposed to the elbow.

What Matt Cooke did last night to Marc Savard is no different than what Mike Richards did earlier this season to David Booth - a hit for which Richards was not suspended.

And I don't give a crap about Cooke's record compared to anyone else's. Either punish everybody with some consistency or don't punish anybody at all.

 

I don't necessarily have a problem with what you're suggesting, just pointing out the ramifications are/can be significantly more than a two-minute minor.

 

And back to goaltending. Ryan Kennedy's has a solid assessment.

http://www.thehockeynews.com/articles/32018-THNcom-Blog-Copious-crease-concerns-for-contenders.html

First off, toss out the notion someone’s going to pull a Cam Ward. The year Carolina won the Cup, the rookie goaltender saw his goals-against average of 3.68 in the regular season drop to 2.14 in the playoffs, while his shutouts went from none to two (in fewer games, no less).

I’m not saying it’s impossible for Michael Leighton or Tuukka Rask to catch fire and shock the world, but let’s not wager on it. Instead, let’s look at some cold, hard numbers.


The top three teams in the NHL right now are Washington, San Jose and Chicago. None of these teams have what could be deemed clutch goaltending, especially compared to the other attributes they excel at.

 

Sometimes, as has been said, you don't need a goalie who will win games for you. You just need a goalie who won't lose games for you.

I'm inclined to think even Hardy Astrom could've won a Cup playing in Edmonton in the mid-'80s.

 

nor do I.

 

I agree on the punish everybody and I hate the star system, but this is the only way Matt Cooke plays. Biggest weasel in the league. Richards is a much more honest player than Matt Cooke could ever dream to be. Wheather Cooke should be suspended or not I'm not sure but I know one thing he won't answer the bell and defend himself. He'll be hiding behind teammates for that.