R2, G2: Panthers @ Maple Leafs - May 4th, 7:00pm - SN, Fan 590

[dekedastardly]

To me this looks like a more obvious intent to injure than Bunting.  I can't help but have my impression the league is biased against Toronto reinforced.

Is it because it's sell outs every games regardless of outcome or standing? Definitely makes you wonder.

[hap_leaf]

We definitely need to dump one of the big 4 contracts and get a goalie, unless Woll turns out to be a Rask or Roy this team has no chance. 

I'd be satisfied with one or two more guys who just play the right way in high stakes hockey. 88 & 34 are soft, avoid physical confrontation when ever possible and consistently take shifts or even 40+ mins off a game.

Not every player neede to excel in so many facets of the game. The same was said of Sundin, he coasts around the ice looking disinterested. It is part of their game. Others grind and they - if anyone will on a given night - be the one to score. Finding a Crosby etc who does it all is rare.

[Rob]

Why do you say house money? I mean you don't think it's cup or bust? Do you think the Cup window will be open for a while?

Winning a playoff round has put them in my good graces for now. I think this is something they can build on for next year regardless of how this series goes.

I agree that they will have a chance to be better next year, but I worry about the year after. This year could be their best, or second-best, chance to win for a while. I know I'm a pessimist, hard not to be these days.

Admittedly it's just the one example but I'm always going to think of the Ovechkin-Backstrom Caps not winning a Title until both were in their 30's. I think in the modern NHL so long as you have a solid foundation the chance to make noise in the playoffs is open longer than you think.

I assume you are comparing Ovechkin-Backstrom to Matthews-Marner.  My pessimism is that one of them (Matthews) will be gone after next year.

I don't have an issue with Matthews, Marner, Nylander.  I wish they could keep them all.  The issue is, Leafs have zero young talent coming up the ranks, and no draft picks.  You can keep those three, and every one of them is going to want a raise on their next contract.  Leafs will have to sign free agents to fill out the roster, overpaying for marginal talent.  We are back to square one, with some pretty good high priced talent, and no supporting cast.

[princedpw]

So didn't see the play but what occurred after the incident? I'm assuming nothing with this crew. I say throw Simmonds in and if the game is out of hand either way lay somebody out. Always said this team has no cajones and when a rookie gets treated like that somebody should have stepped in at least said something let Bennett know that his time will come. I know the game was close so no time for a dumb penalty. I wasn't able to watch the game so I don't know the full story so maybe someone can enlighten me.

It would have been helpful if the league suspended a player for a dirty play.

Can you explain your thinking? Suppose a leaf player jumped a panther during the game. How could that have been helpful?  Are you thinking taking extra penalties is strategically effective? Are you anticipating a short-handed goal? What is the mechanism in play here?

[Nik]

I assume you are comparing Ovechkin-Backstrom to Matthews-Marner.  My pessimism is that one of them (Matthews) will be gone after next year.

I think if it looks that way whoever is running the team will adjust accordingly.

But really my point was more about how in the current cap environment I don't think old notions of "cup windows" apply as much.

[azzurri63]

So didn't see the play but what occurred after the incident? I'm assuming nothing with this crew. I say throw Simmonds in and if the game is out of hand either way lay somebody out. Always said this team has no cajones and when a rookie gets treated like that somebody should have stepped in at least said something let Bennett know that his time will come. I know the game was close so no time for a dumb penalty. I wasn't able to watch the game so I don't know the full story so maybe someone can enlighten me.

It would have been helpful if the league suspended a player for a dirty play.

Can you explain your thinking? Suppose a leaf player jumped a panther during the game. How could that have been helpful?  Are you thinking taking extra penalties is strategically effective? Are you anticipating a short-handed goal? What is the mechanism in play here?

Read my post I said the game was close so no dumb penalty to possibly cost us the game. I said at least someone should have skated over to Bennett and let him know it didn't go unnoticed. Again all I saw was the hit and to me it was dirty. No need to ram the guys head into the ice. Was it addressed in any means was my question?

[Zanzibar Buck-Buck McFate]

We definitely need to dump one of the big 4 contracts and get a goalie, unless Woll turns out to be a Rask or Roy this team has no chance. 

I'd be satisfied with one or two more guys who just play the right way in high stakes hockey. 88 & 34 are soft, avoid physical confrontation when ever possible and consistently take shifts or even 40+ mins off a game.

We've debated 88 in this vein to death but if you think Matthews plays soft and avoids physical play — well you must have missed most of this season.  It's simply not true.  He's not far behind Marner defensively.

[Bender]

We definitely need to dump one of the big 4 contracts and get a goalie, unless Woll turns out to be a Rask or Roy this team has no chance. 

I'd be satisfied with one or two more guys who just play the right way in high stakes hockey. 88 & 34 are soft, avoid physical confrontation when ever possible and consistently take shifts or even 40+ mins off a game.

We've debated 88 in this vein to death but if you think Matthews plays soft and avoids physical play — well you must have missed most of this season.  It's simply not true.  He's not far behind Marner defensively.

I can't believe here we are complaining about a 60 goal scorer.

[BrownRolo]

So didn't see the play but what occurred after the incident? I'm assuming nothing with this crew. I say throw Simmonds in and if the game is out of hand either way lay somebody out. Always said this team has no cajones and when a rookie gets treated like that somebody should have stepped in at least said something let Bennett know that his time will come. I know the game was close so no time for a dumb penalty. I wasn't able to watch the game so I don't know the full story so maybe someone can enlighten me.

It would have been helpful if the league suspended a player for a dirty play.

Can you explain your thinking? Suppose a leaf player jumped a panther during the game. How could that have been helpful?  Are you thinking taking extra penalties is strategically effective? Are you anticipating a short-handed goal? What is the mechanism in play here?

Read my post I said the game was close so no dumb penalty to possibly cost us the game. I said at least someone should have skated over to Bennett and let him know it didn't go unnoticed. Again all I saw was the hit and to me it was dirty. No need to ram the guys head into the ice. Was it addressed in any means was my question?

I saw no reaction. The team doesn't give a shit about each other. I have a feeling it's very cliquey in the dressing room. Remember there was a game near the end of the regular season and Tavares was rocked. McCabe stood up for him. None of the usuals care. Keefe made it a big deal because they all went out for dinner together. Like I thought teams do that all the time. They're a group of good players but they aren't a team. And that's why they can't win in the playoffs.

[4EVRLEAFAN]

So didn't see the play but what occurred after the incident? I'm assuming nothing with this crew. I say throw Simmonds in and if the game is out of hand either way lay somebody out. Always said this team has no cajones and when a rookie gets treated like that somebody should have stepped in at least said something let Bennett know that his time will come. I know the game was close so no time for a dumb penalty. I wasn't able to watch the game so I don't know the full story so maybe someone can enlighten me.

It would have been helpful if the league suspended a player for a dirty play.

Can you explain your thinking? Suppose a leaf player jumped a panther during the game. How could that have been helpful?  Are you thinking taking extra penalties is strategically effective? Are you anticipating a short-handed goal? What is the mechanism in play here?

Read my post I said the game was close so no dumb penalty to possibly cost us the game. I said at least someone should have skated over to Bennett and let him know it didn't go unnoticed. Again all I saw was the hit and to me it was dirty. No need to ram the guys head into the ice. Was it addressed in any means was my question?

I saw no reaction. The team doesn't give a shit about each other. I have a feeling it's very cliquey in the dressing room. Remember there was a game near the end of the regular season and Tavares was rocked. McCabe stood up for him. None of the usuals care. Keefe made it a big deal because they all went out for dinner together. Like I thought teams do that all the time. They're a group of good players but they aren't a team. And that's why they can't win in the playoffs.

Maybe but to be fair Montreal didn't beat us Price did and if Bobrovsky keeps it up he could to, make no mistake but for 4 real dumb mistakes we are absolutely the better team.

[Big Daddy]

So didn't see the play but what occurred after the incident? I'm assuming nothing with this crew. I say throw Simmonds in and if the game is out of hand either way lay somebody out. Always said this team has no cajones and when a rookie gets treated like that somebody should have stepped in at least said something let Bennett know that his time will come. I know the game was close so no time for a dumb penalty. I wasn't able to watch the game so I don't know the full story so maybe someone can enlighten me.

I fell the problem is with the commissioner in that him wanting to grow the game in markets that don't give a shot about hockey to make his rich friends even richer.
When the instigator rule was introduced in 1992 the rate of concussion was .455/100 NHL games in comparison to 20/21 it was at 6.3/100 NHL games. That's an increase of 1285%. NHL used to be the toughest sport. Now you have dirtbags like Bennett running around cross checking and slamming guys and not even looking over his shoulder to see who is coming in to sort him out. It's been out of the game long enough it's time to put it back in. Problem is it gets voted on by the owners who don't give a shit if the players are injured because then insurance takes care of the salary I guess. Totally Friged in my opinion. Want to totally clean up the NHL take out that penalty. Guys can literally not stick up for him and respond because taking a 2 min minor these days especially in playoffs can easily determine the outcome of the game. Want the NHL to better, cleaner, faster then take the mat penalty away.
Enough said. Frig

[Highlander]

So didn't see the play but what occurred after the incident? I'm assuming nothing with this crew. I say throw Simmonds in and if the game is out of hand either way lay somebody out. Always said this team has no cajones and when a rookie gets treated like that somebody should have stepped in at least said something let Bennett know that his time will come. I know the game was close so no time for a dumb penalty. I wasn't able to watch the game so I don't know the full story so maybe someone can enlighten me.

It would have been helpful if the league suspended a player for a dirty play.

Can you explain your thinking? Suppose a leaf player jumped a panther during the game. How could that have been helpful?  Are you thinking taking extra penalties is strategically effective? Are you anticipating a short-handed goal? What is the mechanism in play here?

Read my post I said the game was close so no dumb penalty to possibly cost us the game. I said at least someone should have skated over to Bennett and let him know it didn't go unnoticed. Again all I saw was the hit and to me it was dirty. No need to ram the guys head into the ice. Was it addressed in any means was my question?

I saw no reaction. The team doesn't give a shit about each other. I have a feeling it's very cliquey in the dressing room. Remember there was a game near the end of the regular season and Tavares was rocked. McCabe stood up for him. None of the usuals care. Keefe made it a big deal because they all went out for dinner together. Like I thought teams do that all the time. They're a group of good players but they aren't a team. And that's why they can't win in the playoffs.

What a bunch of BS.  You are not in the locker room, you are not part of the team. Creating false reality.

[Bullfrog]

I'm confused. Am I supposed to be spending time with my family tonight?

[bustaheims]

So didn't see the play but what occurred after the incident? I'm assuming nothing with this crew. I say throw Simmonds in and if the game is out of hand either way lay somebody out. Always said this team has no cajones and when a rookie gets treated like that somebody should have stepped in at least said something let Bennett know that his time will come. I know the game was close so no time for a dumb penalty. I wasn't able to watch the game so I don't know the full story so maybe someone can enlighten me.

I fell the problem is with the commissioner in that him wanting to grow the game in markets that don't give a shot about hockey to make his rich friends even richer.
When the instigator rule was introduced in 1992 the rate of concussion was .455/100 NHL games in comparison to 20/21 it was at 6.3/100 NHL games. That's an increase of 1285%. NHL used to be the toughest sport. Now you have dirtbags like Bennett running around cross checking and slamming guys and not even looking over his shoulder to see who is coming in to sort him out. It's been out of the game long enough it's time to put it back in. Problem is it gets voted on by the owners who don't give a shit if the players are injured because then insurance takes care of the salary I guess. Totally Friged in my opinion. Want to totally clean up the NHL take out that penalty. Guys can literally not stick up for him and respond because taking a 2 min minor these days especially in playoffs can easily determine the outcome of the game. Want the NHL to better, cleaner, faster then take the mat penalty away.
Enough said. Frig

Blaming the increase on concussions on the instigator - or even tying it to it at all - is really mistaking correlation to causation. Concussions are up mostly because medical science has really advanced when it comes to diagnosing them. It used to be only the really severe ones were identified. That's no longer the case. How many fights caused undiagnosed concussions throughout the 80s and 90s? We've seen a number of fighters take their lives because of depression brought on by CTE. I get that there's plenty to criticize about Bettman and the current state of the league, but this is not one of them. The issue isn't the instigator. It's not adequately penalizing when players cross the line with dangerous hits.

[OldTimeHockey]

When the instigator rule was introduced in 1992 the rate of concussion was .455/100 NHL games in comparison to 20/21 it was at 6.3/100 NHL games. That's an increase of 1285%.

That's silly talk man. In 1992, Knies would have played the rest of the game. And would probably be playing tonight. Heck, in 2003, this was ok: