NHL – Page 5 – Keefe To The City

Apr 16, 2012

Brendan Shanahan Is Ruining The NHL

I was satisfied with the decision to give the responsibilities of NHL Judge to Brendan Shanahan. But what I didn’t know was that he would become Colin Campbell.

This column was originally published on WFAN.com on April 16, 2012.

“I’m Brendan Shanahan of the National Hockey League’s Department of Player Safety … and I have absolutely no idea what I’m doing.”

If you have never watched a Shanahan suspension video on NHL.com before, that’s how he opens the video by letting the viewer know who he is and what department he works for (except for the “I have absolutely no idea what I’m doing” part). But chances are if you’re watching one of his videos it’s because you’re interested in the infraction being reviewed. And if you’re interested in watching a video of an infraction it’s because you watch hockey. And if you watch hockey then you know who Brendan Shanahan is. And if you know who Brendan Shanahan is then you know why he is the Vice President of Player Safety and how he got the job.

I was ecstatic like everyone else when Shanahan took over for Colin Campbell, who was more incompetent than the Yankees’ Clay Rapada could ever be. Campbell had become a running joke around the NHL and any form of replacement would have been better than him. I was satisfied with the decision to give the responsibilities of NHL Judge to Shanahan, as he would become the head disciplinarian for the league. But what I didn’t know was that he would become Colin Campbell.

Does Brendan Shanahan think he’s doing a good job because he makes videos to explain the infractions and the punishments he determines for the infractions? Because, if anything, the videos make his decisions look even more nonsensical. At least when Campbell was recklessly throwing around suspensions (or sometimes a lack thereof), there wasn’t video evidence of him narrating plays so we could see inside his inconsistent mind.

In Game 2 of the Rangers-Senators series, Matt Carkner dressed with the mission of fighting Brian Boyle for getting physical with Erik Karlsson, and I have no problem with Carkner dressing for this purpose. But when Boyle decided he wasn’t going to fight Carkner on the first attempt, Carkner decided he was going to fight anyway and sucker-punched Boyle and then continued to punch him as he went down to the ice. In the process, Brandon Dubinsky went to the aid of his defenseless teammate and was given a game misconduct for not allowing Carkner to finish a job that could have ended Boyle’s season or maybe even his career.

Carkner was suspended one game for a pre-meditated attack (which once again I don’t have a problem with since it’s part of the game, but square up or take care of it in the correct setting), but an attack against a guy who didn’t square up with him and led to Carkner doing what he was set out to do anyway. One game! Here’s what Shanahan said in his NHL.com video review of Carkner’s infraction.

“Carkner is excessive in his approach. It is important to note that Carkner has acted similarly in the past and injured an opponent in the process. In a game at Ottawa on Dec. 31, 2009, in reaction to a bodycheck thrown at a teammate, Carkner got the jump on a New York Islander forward and punched him before he could react and defend himself, fracturing his orbital bone. We have taken into consideration that Boyle suffered no apparent injury as a result of this infraction and remained in the game.”

So, let’s recap. Because Boyle wasn’t hurt and because Carkner didn’t fracture yet another player’s orbital bone, the suspension is only one game. That seems fair. Punishments and consequences should definitely be based on the result of the player’s action and not the player’s action or intent. But here’s my question: Is there any doubt that Carkner was trying to break Boyle’s orbital bone and just failed to do so?

It’s only partially Shanahan’s fault that he makes decisions based on the result of the hit or punch or check. For years the NHL has awarded a four-minute power play for a high-sticking penalty that draws blood. Any amount of blood. It could be a scrape or a cut the size of a pencil tip, or it could be a gash that requires 18 stitches or a trip to the emergency room. It doesn’t matter. If there’s blood it’s four minutes. But you could high-stick an opponent and break their jaw or their cheek or their orbital bone or blind them and as long as any of these things don’t draw blood then it’s just a two-minute penalty. No big deal.

Now also in Game 2, Carl Hagelin finished a check high with his hands and elbow on Daniel Alfredsson, which resulted in Alfredsson suffering a concussion and leaving the game. And because Alfredsson was injured on the hit, Hagelin, who doesn’t have a history or a reputation of anything remotely close to being dirty, was suspended three games.

Now if Hagelin’s infraction had been the first infraction of the NHL season and we had no further knowledge or records of previous elbow infractions that result in head injuries then yes, you could make the case his punishment is just since it would set a precedent. (We’ll get to the word “precedent” and teach Shanahan the meaning of the word later on.) But when, in the same game, there is a more dangerous play from a more dangerous player after months and months of inconsistent suspensions from Shanahan, then yes, there’s a serious problem with claiming that Hagelin’s suspension is just.

Let’s look at three different incidents that happened this week with the two involving the Rangers happening on the same day and the one involving the Predators and Red Wings happening three days before.

Carl Hagelin, with no suspension history or reputation of dirty play, receives a three-game suspension for finishing a check and hitting star Daniel Alfredsson high that results in a concussion.

Matt Carkner, with a history of the same exact act, receives a one-game suspension for jumping non-star Brian Boyle, sucker-punching him and continuing to beat him while on the ice, but the incident doesn’t result in injury.

Shea Weber punches star Henrik Zetterberg’s in the back of the head and then uses the same hand that punched to drive Zetterberg’s head into the glass and dasher and receives a $2,500 fine, as the incident doesn’t result in an injury.

(I make sure to note who is considered a “star” and who isn’t since this also clearly impacts Shanahan’s decisions.)

Does anyone see a pattern here? Do any of these punishments have anything in common with each other? Does any of this make sense to anyone other than Brendan Shanahan?

On Monday morning, Shanahan went on Boomer and Carton to justify his suspension of Hagelin (which he failed to logically do). And if you plan on listening to the interview, which I strongly recommend if you think Shanahan is good at his job or makes sound decisions, then I also recommend investing in some of Mugatu’s “crazy pills” from Zoolander because Shanahan’s arguments and logic are so confusing that they will make you question if what he’s saying is actually real life. Here are some epic highlights that came from Shanahan’s mouth in the interview.

On why Carl Hagelin is suspended for three games and Matt Carkner is suspended for one game: “The biggest difference between the two plays is there is head injury and concussion on one and no injury on the other. Now that doesn’t mean that one guy gets off and the other guy doesn’t.”

(I almost feel like this quote should be written above the doors to the NHL offices entrance the way that “I would like to thank the Good Lord for making me a Yankee” used to be written across the front of Yankee Stadium.)

Actually that’s exactly what it means because you said that’s what it means just moments later. Shanahan had a chance to set a precedent at the beginning of the year, but he chose not to. I hate to reference arguably the worst movie ever made in 50 First Dates, but is there any denying that Shanahan is Drew Barrymore here? Actually he’s worse. Barrymore wakes up everyday forgetting who she is and the decisions she has made, but Shanahan can’t even make it through the day without erasing suspension decisions he has made since he makes multiple suspension decisions in the same day and they have no correlation to each other. But Shanahan didn’t set a precedent and now suspensions are made with what I like to think is a cootie catcher complete with the NHL shield on it. In most sports you know what a suspension will be for a certain infraction, but there’s no one in the hockey world that can tell you with any certainty what a suspension will be for a specific incident after it happens, and this includes Shanahan. (If you don’t believe me, listen to the interview when he sort of gets stuck answering about what the suspension would have been if Alfredsson didn’t get hurt or if it will be reduced if he comes back in the series.)

Shanahan has set the tone for the league by saying, “You can do whatever you want as long as it doesn’t result in an injury.” So if the Penguins trail big in Game 4 and a sweep is inevitable, it would be wise for Peter Laviolette to remove his players from the ice because if the Penguins have brushed up on their Marty McSorley, Claude Lemieux, Darcy Tucker and Tie Domi YouTube watching, they are free to duplicate any of the league’s all-time cheap shots … as long as they don’t injure or concuss anyone.

On Carkner not landing many punches to Boyle’s face: “He hits him with five more punches in the arm, shoulder and back and not in the head.”

Ah, and here’s Shanahan sticking up for Carkner. “Come on! Most of the punches didn’t even hit Boyle in the face! It wasn’t that bad!” Do you know how bad Carkner’s assault was? It was bad enough that when I saw the first replays of it during the game I figured Carkner would be gone for the rest of the series, if not the rest of the playoffs (not that he was going to play in anymore games for the Senators anyway). But one game? ONE GAME?!?!?! Does anyone think Carkner was trying to hit Boyle in the arm, shoulder and back? Or was it because Boyle was on the ice after taking a punch to the jaw before the follow-up punches?

On Shea Weber driving Henrik Zetterberg’s face into the glass: “I think that he pushed his face into the glass. I was very close to a one-game suspension on that.”

You “think” he pushed his face into the glass. You “think?!?!?!?!” You don’t “know?” You aren’t “sure?” Oh, but you were “close” to a one-game suspension for Weber trying to break Zetterberg’s face and neck. Well that makes everything better. But because Zetterberg wasn’t injured, Weber can pay $2,500 and try his luck breaking Zetterberg’s face and neck in Game 4.

What if Shanahan held his current job when Chris Simon tried to behead Ryan Hollweg as if he were Ned Stark in Game of Thrones? Because Hollweg was able to get back up on his own skate would Simon have avoided suspension and just been given a $2,500 citation for using his stick as a medieval sword?

There’s no time for Shanahan to learn his new job on the fly, which he is clearly tying to while he makes things up in his videos and interviews as he goes. The problem is his decisions and suspensions have long-lasting effects that go deeper than just changing the course of a game or a series. Shanahan’s job is more important than deciding who should lose pay for a couple of games or should or shouldn’t be allowed to dress. He has the ability to change the course of a playoff series or a championship or the history of the game, as well as influence the jobs and livelihoods of others, and that’s why it’s OK to call into question his job and his livelihood.

Let’s say Shanahan suspends Player X for a few games in a postseason series because he was involved in an infraction that resulted in an injury. Now Player X’s team loses their first-round playoff series because of Player X’s unwarranted suspension. Now Player X’s owner is upset that his team didn’t make it out of the first round after lofty expectations for several seasons and he fires Player X’s coach and general manager and trades away some of Player X’s teammates and uproots their lives and families’ lives because of another first-round postseason exit. Is this an extreme scenario for Shanahan’s decision making? Sure. Is it out of the realm of possibility? No.

At the end of Shanahan’s interview with Boomer and Carton, Boomer tells him he’s going to have a busy day today after the Penguins-Flyers gongshow from Game 3, and Shanahan responds about handing out more suspensions by saying, “I’m not done yet.” It’s too bad because I wish he was done, and I’m not talking about handing out suspensions.

NFL • NHL

Mar 29, 2012

The Most Wonderful Time of the Year

With the city about to become sports crazy with the combination of early-season baseball games mixed with playoff hockey and basketball, it’s time for some random thoughts.

We made it! We made it through the dog days of the sports calendar that starts the day after the Super Bowl and ends with March Madness. Now it’s smooth sailing until the MLB All-Star break when the sports world shuts down and ESPN uses the week to replay every Home Run Derby from the last decade.

The Giants got me through the brutal winter months, which weren’t so brutal thanks to a lack of snow and this run of awesome weather that created a spring training-like atmosphere for the northeast. And now we have almost arrived at the greatest day of them all: Opening Day.

April presents the perfect storm of sports with Opening Day clashing with the beginning of the NHL and NBA postseasons. Well, unless you’re a Mets, Islanders and Nets fan, then I don’t know what you do to get your sports fix since waiting for the Jets’ season isn’t really an option. It’s The Most Wonderful Time of the Year, and it has led me to want to remake this Staples commercial that my dad used to tease me with when the summer was coming to a close.

We are at the point where the Yankees are ready for their third attempt at No. 28, the Rangers are in a position they haven’t been in 15 years and the Knicks look like they might be able to win at least one playoff game. Yankee Stadium is ready to open in 15 days and Madison Square Garden might actually host sporting events in late April, possibly May and if we’re lucky June.

With New York City about to become sports crazy with the combination of the new-car smell of early-season baseball games mixed with the importance of playoff hockey and basketball, there really is no better time to start a weekly random thoughts column to make sure nothing gets lost in the shuffle throughout the week.

I decided to leave the Yankees out of this for now since there’s a lot to get to with them and I’ll get to it all next week leading up to Opening Day. For now, here are some non-baseball thoughts as I mentally prepare myself for next Friday at 3:10 p.m.

– Ryan Callahan is having a magical year as every shot he takes goes in or almost goes in. He doesn’t have the hands, offensive skills or talent of the premiere scorers in the league, but he certainly has the “goal scorer’s touch” and yes, it’s a real thing. It doesn’t matter if he’s scoring the most garbage of goals on a sloppy rebound or sniping bar down in a shootout, it seems like there isn’t a goalie when Callahan is shooting.

On Wednesday night, Callahan scored one of his patented “touch” goals when he missed an attempt on what would have been a pretty goal in front of the net, but instead of scoring, he shot it off a defenseman, and because he’s Ryan Callahan, the puck went right back to his stick blade rather than into the corner or to one of the other nine guys on the ice. Callahan knew what to do with it and found the back of the net. Moments later he came down and let one loose off the crossbar.

It’s things like Callahan’s goals, the way the team scores ugly goals as a whole and find ways to win games, and the play from the soon-to-be-Vezina-winner Henrik Lundqvist that makes me think if the Rangers can’t win it this season they might not get a chance like this with all the stars aligning again.

– There’s not much to think about Tim Tebow going to the Jets other than the Jets are an absolute joke. I like Tebow and like watching him play and like watching media members scramble to try and analyze and make sense of his success, so this might be the first Jets player I root for.

Woody, Mr. T and Rex continue to say that Mark Sanchez is their starting quarterback “period” but if that’s the case, who holds a press conference for their backup quarterback? However, the trio also tells us they didn’t bring Tim Tebow here to be a backup? Can I offer anyone some crazy pills?

The problem is that Sanchez isn’t the Jets’ starting quarterback “period.” The first time Sanchez throws an interception or a pick-six or the offense goes three-and-out at Giants Stadium (I’m dropping MetLife from the name), you’re going to hear the kind of “Tebow” chants that rained down on Mile High Stadium in Week 1 last year while Kyle Orton lost to the Raiders. Those chants are powerful, and they will carry over to sports radio and TV. And those same chants that pushed Kyle Orton out of town and gave John Elway and John Fox no choice but to start Tebow and give the people what they want will be infinitely more powerful in New York. Because let’s be honest, Mark Sanchez isn’t going to do anything to prevent or stifle them.

And how do you have a press conference for maybe the most polarizing athlete in the world with the New York media present and the owner, general manager and head coach are nowhere to be found? The only Jets representative that was present was Jared Winley. The same guy Jared Winley who told Darrelle Revis to hang up on Mike Francesa last October. J! E! T! S! JETS! JETS! JETS!

– For as dominant as the Rangers have been, they still aren’t the best team in the Eastern Conference. That title belongs to the Penguins. And for as dominant as the Rangers have been, they are in a tough situation as the No. 1 seed right now. Pittsburgh trails them by five points with a game in hand, and if Pittsburgh takes over the top seed, the Rangers will face the Flyers in the first round. Sure, the Rangers are undefeated against the Flyers, but the Flyers are 10-3-1 in March, a division rival and if you believe in being “due” or the law of averages, the Flyers are the worst possible first-round matchup for the Rangers.

If the Rangers come out as the No. 1 seed, which they are likely to do, then they will likely face the Senators (currently No. 7), Sabres (currently No. 8) or Capitals (currently No. 9). (There’s also a chance they could face the Devils if a series of insane events happens.)

The Senators looked like they might take over the No. 2 seed from the Bruins, but then they lost five of six over a two-week stretch this month, and now they are battling just to fend off the Sabres and Capitals. The Sabres have won five straight and have outscored opponents 22-5 in those five games (including a 4-1 win over the Rangers). The Capitals have been up and down in March, but does anyone really want to face the Capitals after what happened in 2008-09 and last year even if they aren’t exactly the same team?

This is tricky because the Rangers have a past with the Capitals even if they are the weakest team of the three, and the Rangers and Sabres play a very similar style, and Ryan Miller just happens to be getting 2010 Olympics hot right now.

Despite what Brian Monzo tells me about being scared of the Senators knocking off the Rangers, I think I would want to play Ottawa then Washington then Buffalo, but this has been changing daily.

– What’s Mike D’Antoni doing right now? Sure, he will have $24 million from the Knicks when all is said and done, but there’s no way he doesn’t look like Ron Burgundy (it’s a mustache thing) after being fired from Channel 4 as an unemployed drunk who’s hated by the city. The last thing you want to see your team do when you’re let go is win, and the Knicks beat the Trail Blazers by 42 on the same day D’Antoni “resigned” and now they’re 8-1 with Mike Woodson as the head coach.

– I’m happy to see Bartolo Colon continuing his great comeback (8 IP, 3 H, 1 R, 1 ER, 1 BB, 6 K on Thursday morning against Seattle). I was 100-percent wrong a year ago when I said he was a bad idea for the Yankees to put on the roster, and this was even before he was put into the rotation. I do wish we got to see him start Game 2 of the ALDS.

– Thank you and goodbye to Brandon Jacobs. Even though I actually felt like Jacobs picked it up down the stretch and in the postseason he has clearly declined drastically since the 2007 run and his superb 2008 run. He became a locker room distraction, a loudmouth with the media and even entered the A.J. Burnett Zone from which there is no return. I will remember Jacobs for the good times and try to forget about the bad times (unless I need to reference them to draw comparison to something else that’s negative). He leaves New York for the 49ers as a two-time champion, and now I can only hope he fumbles against the Giants in next year’s NFC Championship Game.

Blogs • NHL

Feb 10, 2011

How to Fix the NHL

There are three main problems with the NHL and the way they currently police problems in the league that just need some slight modifying to make the game better and safer.

There’s no real beginning and end to any sports year, but I like to think that the Super Bowl is the New Year’s Eve of the sports year. The only difference is that everyone is hungover the Monday after the Super Bowl, but it’s not a holiday (though it should be) like New Year’s Day. And like New Year’s Day meaning the end of the holiday season and the long winter months ahead, the Super Bowl means the end of football and not quite the beginning of baseball with February and March still to go.

I didn’t care who won the Super Bowl. It was a lose-lose situation. If Ben Roethlisberger won for the third time there would be stories about how he “changed” and “turned” his life around over the course of a season. And if Aaron Rodgers won for the first time there would be stories calling him the next big thing and prematurely putting him in the same class as Tom Brady, Peyton Manning and Drew Brees.

So, no good could really come from the outcome of Sunday’s game. I just wanted the Rocky Mountains to be blue, the pizza and wings to be good, the commercials to be funny and for David Letterman to not sell out and do any more spots with Jay Leno like he did last year. All of these things happened, so for me it was a good Super Bowl. And if the Giants couldn’t win it, I’m just glad that the Jets, Eagles, Patriots and Cowboys couldn’t either.

The Super Bowl without the Giants in it serves sort of the same purpose as Marathon Monday did for me in college in Boston. I wasn’t running the marathon and I wasn’t going to attend or watch the 11 a.m. Red Sox game, so it was just an excuse to party and still is. If the Giants were playing on Sunday, it would still have been an excuse to party, but I would have actually been emotionally attached and focused on the game and wouldn’t have watched it in the setting that I did. But the Giants’ season ended six Sundays before XLV when the eventual champion Packers finished a job the Eagles started.

As soon as the Super Bowl ended, the awkward time of the year began as it does every year after the Super Bowl. The time between the Super Bowl and spring training, which is really the time between the Super Bowl and Opening Day. Because aside from a few highlights like the first day of pitchers and catchers, the first spring training game, St. Patrick’s Day in Hoboken and the first four days of March Madness, February and March are as bad as the weather.

Luckily I’m a hockey fan and with the weeks leading up to the trade deadline and under 30 games left on the calendar, the NHL is getting primed for the stretch run. The Rangers have 26 games remaining to find out if they can score more than two goals in a game on a consistent basis and John Tortorella has that time to prove that he should be back for another season in New York. The next eight weeks should be a lot of fun.

With the Rangers having four days off, I spent Wednesday night watching the Bruins-Canadiens game, which had the feeling of the Bruins-Canadiens games of two and three years ago with the melees of Bruins-Canadiens games from decades ago. It was the best game of the year and the NHL probably feels like it won the lottery that it aired on Versus (though I watched it on the NESN feed).

It’s safe to say that sold-out crowd of 17,565 at Boston’s TD Garden will be going back for another game in the near future. 14 goals. 192 PIMs. 12 fighting majors. Seven misconducts. Two line brawls. One goalie fight. It was nearly a three-hour infomercial for the NHL and the best unintentional advertising the NHL has done since last February’s Olympics. If only the NHL could figure out a way to market their game better on purpose then games like Wednesday night could just be the cherry on top. Then maybe they could compete with the other three leagues.

But what made the Bruins-Canadiens gongshow on Wednesday so entertaining that my Twitter and Facebook feeds were full of people commenting on the game and why my phone was constantly vibrating was because it was everything the NHL is supposed to be. The only thing it really lacked was big saves, which is odd because of two of the six All-Star Game goalies were playing.

The one thing the game didn’t have was cheap shots. Lingering problems from January between the teams were taken care of the way they are supposed to be: by dropping the gloves. No one had to get run from behind or given a flying elbow outside the finishing-your-check window. No one ran anyone’s goalie (though I was hoping for this to incite another bench clear), and no one tried to dangerously take out a skill player from the other team.

Why is this all of this a big deal? Because earlier in the afternoon, the NHL’s posterboy for dangerous play, Matt Cooke, was given a four-game suspension for his vicious hit from behind on defenseman Fedor Tyutin, which was the latest dangerous play on a resume that could go toe-to-toe with Darcy Tucker’s from seven and eight years ago. Cooke has become a household name in the NHL for all the wrong reasons – another unintentional marketing campaign by the NHL.

For the most part, the league office has protected Cooke because of wordy and awkward rules that leave a lot of the game open to interpretation. But when your head of discipline is Colin Campbell, nothing should be left open to interpretation. Otherwise we get situations like last year when Cooke left the scene of his brutal hit on Marc Savard unscathed, while Savard has battled severe post-concussion syndrome and is now out for the remainder of the year after suffering another concussion. So instead of all-around physical games like the Bruins-Canadiens game on Wednesday, we have games in which Cooke and other players that don’t care about the livelihood or careers of others are free to do whatever they choose because they know the league might not have an answer for them.

There should be more games like the Bruins-Canadiens played and fewer games in which skill players can’t use their skills because players with lesser talent like Matt Cooke aren’t skating around with intent to injure on every shift. There are three main problems with the NHL and the way they currently police problems in the league that just need some slight modifying to make the game better and safer. And since the only thing Gary Bettman has to worry about right now is how he can book Hoobastank to perform at next year’s All-Star Game, I think he would be willing to listen for once.

1. The Instigator Rule

We could talk about all the ways that Gary Bettman has ruined the NHL, but I don’t think anyone is willing to sacrifice two years of their life talking about Bettman’s questionable leaderships and nonsensical decisions. But the one rule that Bettman has enforced worse than any other rule is the instigator rule.

The instigator rule was implemented to protect players that couldn’t protect themselves from being jumped. Instead it has done the opposite, by letting players that can’t protect themselves commit acts against they shouldn’t be.

If Player A wants to do something to Player B they can, and then if they don’t drop their gloves and fight, it’s OK. And then if Player B or a teammate of Player B wants to get back at Player A or a teammate of Player A later, they can’t because Player A is protected by the instigator rule. It’s disgusting.

There’s a reason why Wayne Gretzky played as long as he did and was able to put up the points he did aside from his natural talent. Because Gretzky and other scorers of his era didn’t have to worry about players like Matt Cooke taking runs at him since Dave Semenko and Marty McSorley wouldn’t stand for that.

Sidney Crosby hasn’t played in a game since January 5 because of a concussion and no one really knows when he will return. The game’s biggest star is sitting at home with the stretch run of the season getting underway because he was hit in the head, and there is still nothing being concretely done to prevent hits to the head with the NHL’s most important marketing tool of this generation out of commission.

Crosby’s teammate Cooke (who will probably end up getting Crosby killed eventually) tried to take out the game’s second biggest star, Alexander Ovechkin, with a leg trip that would make you throw up your most recent meal. What if Ovechkin had gotten hurt or been forced to miss a lengthy amount of time? Any league is only as good as its best players and the NHL would be without their best two because of scum skating around doing whatever they please because the rules built to protect the victims are actually protecting the dirty players.

The instigator rule isn’t going anywhere because the NHL doesn’t want to increase fighting, though they do at least recognize it’s a necessary part of the game. But if you don’t want to increase fighting, make it so that head shots are no longer a part of the game, by enforcing serious suspensions for those that think it should be a part of the game. Otherwise the only way Matt Cooke will learn his lesson will be once it’s too late and someone puts a Tim McCracken-like bounty on his head.

2. Suspensions

I’m not sure how the NHL decides the length of suspensions. You would think there would be some sort of rulebook for suspensions or some sort of procedure or at least some logic to determine if a player should be suspended and the severity of the suspension. But none of these things exist. For some time I thought that Colin Campbell used a cootie catcher to decide suspensions, and I still think he does because he has done nothing to dispel this idea.

Last week, Daniel Paille of the Bruins, whose dangerous play resume consists of drinking too many Cokes during games in which he is a healthy scratch for the Bruins (which is often) made an illegal (though this is questionable because Scott Stevens made a career off similar hits and is considered a legend for it), but not dirty hit. He was given a four-game suspension.

Matt Cooke’s dangerous past should be enough where he shouldn’t be able to make money playing hockey anymore, yet after being a repeat offender, he was given the same suspension as Paille despite CHARGING at Tyutin, LEAVING HIS FEET and drilling Tyutin FROM BEHIND with a few feet between Tyutin and the boards.

For anyone that has followed Campbell’s time as the league’s principal disciplinarian, it’s evident he has no idea how to fairly decide the difference between legal and illegal the way that I can’t figure out the difference between navy and purple and dark green and brown sometimes. Jack Edwards, Bruins TV play-by-play man, captured Campbell’s unique decision making with a piece two seasons ago.

3. The Officiating

Maybe it’s just me but I think the referees and linesmen do a terrible job of letting things play out on their own. (I’m pretty sure it’s not just me). Instead of letting players police themselves the way it used to be, the officials interfere too much with the flow of the games and don’t let situations take care of themselves.

Too many times the officials interrupt the pace of the game try to stop things before they happen like the pre-cogs in Minority Report. Sometimes you need to let the game play its course and let the players play the game the way it’s been played forever. No one paid the insane prices the NHL charges to go see the officials. They paid to see the players. Let them play.

The NHL has tried its best to make fighting as clean and socially acceptable as possible from the wordy fighting rules to the tie downs on jerseys, and even the way fights are officiated with the refs hovering around the fight so close that it looks they are nervous parents allowing their children to walk for the first. Watch a fight from before the game was toned down when refs would be nowhere in site and players had a chance to actually settle the score without being separated before it ever gets going.

Sure there were dirty players then. There will always be dirty players trying to get an edge by attempting to injure others. But no one had to worry about Matt Cooke trying to tear their ACL or paralyze them because the league’s rulebook had evolved so poorly.

Blogs • NHL

Dec 16, 2010

Must-See TV

The debut of 24/7 Penguins-Capitals: Road to the Winter Classic instantly took over the No. 1 spot on my TV power rankings.

I have a hard time deciding what my favorite show on TV is. There’s The Office, The League, Friday Night Lights and Curb Your Enthusiasm. If I could only watch one, I honestly have no idea which show I would pick. But I think that problem was solved on Wednesday night with the debut of 24/7 Penguins-Capitals: Road to the Winter Classic, which is easily the best show on TV and it instantly took over the No. 1 spot on my TV power rankings.

If you didn’t see it, watch it … now. Stop whatever you’re doing and watch it because it’s that good. And if you did watch it and aren’t more excited for next Wednesday instead of next Friday because of it, then I don’t know what’s wrong with you.

The series is a combination of every 24/7 boxing series and Hard Knocks on steroids. That’s how good it is. I was sold on the show well before Maxine Nightingale’s “Right Back Where We Started From” came on in the middle of the Penguins’ road trip, but as someone who could recite lines from Slapshot before I could recite the Pledge of Allegiance, the incorporation of the song took the show to another level.

Nothing is played up because HBO is there. Those were real F-bombs you heard for 60 minutes, not the overly exaggerated fake F-bombs of Rex Ryan to become to a character on a TV show. And HBO couldn’t have started filming at a better time with the Penguins being the hottest team in the league and only the Islanders playing worse than the Capitals are right now.

I’m sure Penguins fans had a lot of fun reliving their winning streak behind the scenes, and Capitals fans probably took out their emotions on some household items as a result of the team’s slide. But there might not have been a more angry fan base than Bruins fans who had to watch Matt Cooke having fun living life and saying, “There is no easy ice,” when he is on the ice, knowing that Marc Savard is still feeling the side effects of the nasty elbow Cooke gave him last season.

Within the main story line of “Penguins vs. Capitals” and their paths to the Winter Classic are other story lines that, as a fan, help to enhance the show and make you pick a side when watching it. The show isn’t supposed to be about good vs. bad or to sway you in favor of one team, but if you’re not a fan of either team, which I’m not, there are three separate stories embedded into the show that will help you decide which team to pull for in the 2011 Winter Classic.

Sidney Crosby vs. Alexander Ovechkin
These two players will be linked and connected throughout their entire careers, and if you’re a hockey fan, you’re either a Crosby guy or an Ovechkin guy. You can’t be both. You have to pick one. I’m a Crosby guy and have been from Day One, though I am pretty much alone on this among my friends.

When Evgeni Malkin is watching the game against Toronto on TV and laughs while saying, “Sid … Look,” as Crosby joins a scrum in front of the net after a whistle, I couldn’t help, but think of all the cheap shots and slew foots the Penguins committed against the Rangers in the 2006-07 Eastern Conference semifinals. But being able to play that way and get away with it is part of the game and a big part of the Penguins’ game, and it’s what makes them good. And it’s what makes me like them and like watching them play.

Is Crosby chippy and even dirty? Yes. Does he excessively whine to refs and dive? Yes. Does he get into scrums in front of the net after whistles because he knows that he won’t get a penalty and that no one will touch him then? Yes. Is he the best player in the world? Yes.

Capitals assistant coach Dean Evason made it a point to call Ovechkin “the greatest player in the world” during his locker room rant when the Rangers scored more goals against the Capitals than the Jets did points against the Dolphins last Sunday (7-6).

“Our best player is fighting! The greatest player in the world!”

I understand that Evason was trying to make the point that the Capitals were embarrassing themselves and there’s no need for Ovechkin to be fighting when the team is getting shutout, but was it necessary to call Ovechkin “the greatest player in the world?” Sure, that’s Evason’s opinion and he spends every day around Ovechkin, so I would expect his opinion to be skewed, and I’m probably making too big of a deal about nothing, but do you think the Pittsburgh coaching staff is telling Crosby he is the best player in the world? No, because he knows he is.

Ovechkin is the most exciting player in the world, but to me, he isn’t the greatest. (And how about his weird tramp stamp tattoo?) When he’s on the ice you pay attention because he could do something you have never seen before, but that doesn’t make him the best. Sean Avery is also an exciting player because when he’s on the ice he might jump someone or commit an act that forces the NHL to create a new rule overnight, but sadly, being exciting doesn’t make you “the greatest.”

Dan Bylsma vs. Bruce Boudreau
It’s hard to know exactly who Dan Bylsma and Bruce Boudreau are from one episode because Bylsma is in the middle of 12-game winning streak while Boudreau can’t even find a way to beat the Panthers. At the end of the premiere, narrator Liev Schreiber says, “Teams are never as bad as they appear during their lowest points, and never as good as they seem during their highest ones,” but right now, that’s all we have to go off of when evaluating the two head coaches.

There isn’t much to dislike about Dan Bylsma. He seems to have found the perfect medium between being an imposing authoritative figure and still being able to have fun with his players. He isn’t exactly their friend, but he isn’t just a coach. His pregame and intermission speeches are solid, and the little nuances (the clapping for the announcing of the staring lineup) and games (Mustache Boy shootout) he has instituted into the team’s practices and locker room environment are unique and entertaining. The only real downfall for Bylsma in the first episode was watching him take one-timers at practice.

I’m not sure Bruce Boudreau is going to make it through the whole season of 24/7. Once you start making positives out of losses and tell your team to build off a losing effort, well the end can’t be far away. Are the Capitals’ struggles all because of Boudreau? No, but neither are the three straight division titles that HBO seemed to make it sound like. His biggest problem is that he has terrible goaltending. Yet somehow, he has the intestinal fortitude to criticize Henrik Lundqvist and say, “Lundqvist likes to come out of the net” before the game against the Rangers.

I always wonder how NHL coaches are able to keep their emotions in check on the bench and always have the same serious and puzzled face like they’re watching the State of the Union address. Rarely do you ever see NHL coaches clap or fist pump after a goal, and the only time you ever see them talking during a game is when they are trying to sort out a mess of penalty minutes with the ref. The other night the Red Wings lost to the Kings 5-0 and as soon as the game ended the cameras showed Mike Babcock, and after being shutout at home, he looked exactly the same as he would if he had been on the winning end of the shutout. Bruce Boudreau is the exception to the rule.

Between elbowing the glass and freaking out on the bench during his team’s current losing streak, it’s no wonder the Capitals have little to no composure when they are forced to play from behind. In the event of a fire or an emergency, Boudreau is the last guy I would want being in charge of the safety of people’s lives. (That and the fact in one of his Real World-like confessions, he had either ketchup or barbeque sauce all over his face). He appears to be the complete opposite of Bylsma, who probably checks himself in the mirror a dozen times before being on camera, and I’m not sure how many NHL players can take their coach seriously when he shows up to practice in all red Capitals warmup gear with his stomach hanging over his pants like he is going to be Santa Claus at the Penguins’ team Christmas party.

Penguins Not Named Sidney Crosby vs. Capitals Not Named Alexander Ovechkin
It might have something to do with the extreme opposites of where the teams are right now, but the Penguins are a more likable team than the Capitals after one episode.

(On an unrelated side note: I went on a tour of the Verizon Center in D.C. in the summer of 1998 (it was the MCI Center then), the week after the Capitals were swept by the Red Wings in the finals. The building was a year old at that time and the locker rooms were incredible in the state-of-the-art facility. But after seeing what a locker room that was built 13 years ago looks like compared to the Penguins’ new locker room and arena, well there isn’t much of a comparison. The Verizon Center already looks old.)

I guess it’s interesting to see the life changes that a player experiences like Scott Hannan trying to rent a new house after being traded in the final year of his contract, or watching Pascal Dupuis say goodbye to his family before a road trip, but that’s not what people want to see.

Seven and eight years ago, ESPN had a similar show called The Season and one year they followed the Red Wings (when everyone was introduced to a call-up by the name of Sean Avery) and the next year they followed the Avalanche. In the Avalanche season, there is a scene on the plane where Peter Forsberg and some other guys are playing Tiger Woods on their computers against each other, and at the time I thought it was unreal. Then you see the Penguins in 2010 playing what looked to be Call of Duty on PSP and it’s just that much cooler. Sure there are the outcasts like Harvard grad Craig Adams reading a book on the plane while everyone is playing video games or cards, but aside from that, who wouldn’t want to be on the Penguins? Then again, that’s likely the difference between a team that’s winning and a team that’s losing.

The most intriguing Penguin was without a double Max Talbot who showed the stereotypical hockey player combination of being, odd, weird and creepy, and making sure to keep all these qualities balanced. Malkin and Marc-Andre Fleury had their moments as well, but in the few minutes that Talbot had the camera on him, he stole the show.

From the Capitals we saw a lot of depression as a result of losing. Mike Green was more upset that the team was in a funk than the fact that he had a sprained MCL and still wanted to play.

The Capitals lost again on Wednesday night in overtime to the Ducks and their losing streak is at seven, but hopefully their weekend road trip to Boston and New Jersey will give them a personality for next week.

Blogs • NHL

Mar 22, 2010

A Face-Lift for the NHL Playoffs

The odds of filling out a perfect NCAA bracket are 9,223,372,036,854,775,808 to 1. I’d like to think the odds of not getting a shot on goal during a four-minute power play are close to the

The odds of filling out a perfect NCAA bracket are 9,223,372,036,854,775,808 to 1. I’d like to think the odds of not getting a shot on goal during a four-minute power play are close to the same. But that’s what happened on Sunday when Marian Gaborik got high-sticked by Zdeno Chara, and the Rangers wasted a double minor against the Bruins in a must-win game.

The Rangers’ season came to an end on Sunday, three weeks before their last game is scheduled. Now sitting five points behind the Bruins for eighth place, and four points behind the Thrashers for ninth, only three points separate the Rangers and the lowly Islanders. A 3-5-2 record since the Olympic break has the Rangers closer to being the worst of three teams in the tri-state area than being in the postseason right now. However, after watching them fail on six power-play opportunities and once again leave Henrik Lundqvist out to dry, last place is where they belong.

There is nothing more depressing than watching regular season games that have no meaning. And with the Rangers ending their season on Sunday, the Knicks having ended their season in November and my NCAA bracket being destroyed by Kansas, it’s going to be a long 13 days until the Yankees and Red Sox meet at Fenway Park on Easter Sunday.

Maybe the Rangers not making the playoffs was actually a good thing. For one, it clearly shows Glen Sather that the team needs change (though he likely won’t make the necessary changes), and it probably would have just been depressing to watch the Capitals sweep the Rangers in four straight.

Even though a glimmer of hope still remains for the Rangers’ chances to make the postseason, they don’t deserve to – at least not under the current playoff format. But the current playoff format has a place for teams that finish .500 or barely better. And in the Eastern Conference, there are multiple spots in the postseason for teams in that category.

The NHL currently lets 53% of its teams into the postseason – tied with the NBA for the most playoff teams among the major sports. And the only reward for the top teams in the NHL is home-ice advantage for Games 1, 2, 5 and 7. Maybe home-ice is enough of an incentive for teams to finish at the top of their conference in the regular season, but in the era of cookie-cutter arenas, the idea of home-ice advantage ended when the lights went out on places like the Boston Garden, Montreal Forum and Maple Leaf Gardens. Home-ice advantages today are few and far between, and it’s hard to understand how “home ice” could be enough of a reward for a team that played better than .700 hockey for more than six months.

Sure, it would already be a daunting task for the currently eighth-seeded Bruins to take down the top-seeded Capitals in a best-of-seven, it’s not improbable. It’s not as improbable as it should be, and if Tim Thomas or Tuukka Rask were to get hot for a few days in April, the Capitals could be joining the Rangers at Alpine Country Club before the first of May.

It might be hard for the Bruins to eliminate the Capitals in the first round of the playoffs, like it would be for any eighth seed to upend a first seed, but it should be a lot harder. There needs to be more of an incentive for teams to finish at or near the top of their conference, and there should be as much punishment as there is reward for teams that find the second season via the back door.

Under the current playoff format, there are three seven-game series for each conference and then the Stanley Cup finals, which is also a seven-game series. The 1, 2, 3 and 4 seeds are granted home-ice advantage in the first round and then the matchups reseed in the second round to determine the home-ice advantage. Using the Eastern Conference, if the playoffs started today, the matchups would be:

1. Capitals vs. 8. Bruins

2. Penguins vs. 7. Canadiens

3. Sabres vs. 6. Flyers

4. Devils vs. 5. Senators

The 16-team format has been used since the 1993-94 season, and it is the only format I am old enough to remember, and therefore the only format I have really ever known. I am OK with 16 teams making the postseason in the NHL, but how you get those 16 teams is a different story.

I have always wondered how the top teams in the league could be better rewarded for their regular-season success, and maybe it’s the 100 or so hours of college basketball or the college hockey playoffs that has finally given me the answer I have been searching for, but I think have finally found the solution to fairly modify the NHL postseason.

In the new-and-improved postseason, 10 teams would last past Game 82. The top six teams would clinch playoff berths and the bottom four teams would play to decide the final two spots in the conference.

Here are the top 10 teams in the East right now:

1. Capitals
2. Penguins
3. Sabres
4. Devils
5. Senators
6. Flyers
7. Canadiens
8. Bruins
9. Thrashers
10. Rangers

The Capitals, Penguins, Sabres, Devils, Senators and Flyers would be in the playoffs. The Canadiens, Bruins Thrashers and Rangers would play to decide the seventh and eighth seeds in the postseason.

The last day of the NHL season this year is Sunday, April 11. Under the new format, on Monday, April 12, the Canadiens, Bruins, Thrashers and Rangers would begin two three-game series. The teams would be seeded for the mini series in the order that they finished the regular season and the matchups would be:

7. Canadiens vs. 10. Rangers

8. Bruins vs. 9. Thrashers

The higher seeds (Canadiens and Bruins) would host every game of the three-game series. The winners of each series would fill the seventh and eighth seeds in the postseason. Once the eight seeds are determined following the conclusion of the three-game series, the postseason would return to its current format of seven-games series.

Under this proposed format, you are forcing the bubble teams to play on consecutive days right after finishing the regular season, in which they would have likely already been playing with a mentally-draining postseason mentality. You are rewarding the seventh and eighth seeds by allowing them to host the entire three-game series, while also punishing them for an average regular season by making them win an additional series just to reach the real postseason.

This way, the higher seeds in the conference get a few days of rest before the two-plus month playoff grind begins, and the top two seeds in the conference get the luxury of hosting a team that spent the last few weeks of the regular season fighting to play in the postseason, and then had to fight some more in a three-game mini series just to reach the actual postseason. There would finally be a real incentive for teams to finish atop the conference.

Not only is this format good for the top two seeds in both conferences, it is also good for the league as a whole. It would give teams that wouldn’t have made the postseason otherwise an alternate but also laborious route in, even if they would wind up meeting a rested top seed in the first round. It would make more teams eligible down the stretch for the 7, 8, 9, and 10 seeds, creating excitement for franchises that would have likely been dormant over the final month of the season. It would give the NHL the excitement MLB gets from its small postseason field and rare one-game playoffs, the stimulation the NFL playoffs generate from a one-and-done format and the theatrics the NCAA Tournament produces from being “March Madness.”

The NHL would be able to generate revenue through the two additional series, and they would be able to sell it as the prelude to the postseason. There is no doubt that the short series could create the sort of drama needed to build a bigger audience for the game, and with the actual postseason taking place over April, May and June, only real hockey enthusiasts remain attracted to the playoffs the entire time. The short series could give the the casual fan a quick fix for playoff hockey, and it might be enough for those new and interested fans to stick around for the long haul.

There is no reason this format can’t be implemented by the NHL. It keeps the current format intact, while also making a fair and just postseason for the teams that deserve to be in the postseason. The postseason is the ultimate reward for the regular season’s elite. It isn’t meant for the average and below average, which is it what it is currently designed for.

Last week during the Bruins-Hurricanes game, Andy Brickley said that “points are at a premium at this time of the season for the Bruins” – a phrase that has always made me laugh. A win is still two points and an overtime or shootout loss is still one point. The points aren’t any more valuable or “premium” now. What he should have said was “points are imperative” or “scarce” at this time of the season because the Bruins waited until the final weeks of the season to play with urgency.

The same goes for the Rangers as they try to salvage what is left of their most disappointing season in the post-lockout era. If the Rangers had played with consistency at any point this year, they wouldn’t find themselves with their backs against the wall as the season winds down, and they run out of possible points and time.

Success down the stretch will result in the Bruins being rewarded with the eighth and final seed in the postseason. Success all season for the Capitals will give them the top seed in the Eastern Conference and home-ice advantage throughout the postseason. But one more home game in a possible seven-game series isn’t enough disparity between a team that played outstanding for six-plus months and one that played outstanding for one month. The Capitals and whichever team emerges as the best in West deserve more. They at least deserve the opportunity for a few extra days rest and the chance to play a tired and banged-up team that slipped in through the back door in the first round.