If repeat offender even plays into it at all, Matt Cooke's minimum suspension should've started at 20 games years ago. He is the definition of a repeat offender with way more infractions (called or not) than Gillies yet he gets puny suspensions. But hey, he chips in pucks every now and then so he's all good. Das Boooools***.
"Since the lockout, however, the league is trying to tame the frontier justice. The problem is that their solution - the ill-named "instigator" penalty - actually punishes the enforcer and NOT the instigator, the guy running around and stirring the pot. Not surprisingly, those guys are stirring harder and faster than ever, with no end in sight."
Couldn't have said it better myself. Oh wait! Great column by the way.
More good stuff..."The current "fighting has no place in our game" moralizing from the league is complete hogwash, frankly. It's self-serving, and allows Bettman and Campbell to sound correct while actually doing things that are the exact oposite of helpful. The goon who does nothing but fight is bad for the game, they say; well, what about the goon who does nothing but endanger other guys' health and careers? The enforcer would be far less necessary if you cracked down on the behavior he's there to punish! Heck - enforcers might even need to be able to carry their weight for 8-10 minutes a night. Wonder of wonders, if you curtail dirty play, you might just improve the quality of the hockey being played. Once you get past the tribal instinct of "my team good, all others suq lulz !!!one!!1!" the fans get that; they know punishing the enforcer more than the troublemaker serves, in practice, to protect the troublemaker. That's the real reason why dirty play is on the rise."
Gillies is an old-school enforcer that gives retribution to the offending player. I think he went about it in the wrong way (again) but I can see his intention.
My thoughts exactly. If there was no instigator rule, Gillies would've likely grabbed Clutterbuck and whooped his ass, instead he delivers a quick (and cheap) hit and hopes to get away with it. Oh well...
And won the cup without a deadline deal. Point being, a team isn't required to change assets at the deadline to be a player in the post-season.
Nobody said it was a must except you?
Regular season complacency in February isn't a new thing in Detroit.
If Holland thought there was a move that would make this team better, he would do it. There are a couple guys that would be nice to have but they may not even be available or had at the right price to come to Detroit. Either way, one or two deals isn't going to shake up the team.
Maybe if we weren't right up against the cap every trade deadline we could make some good moves to help things like our D and backup goalie situations when they're needed. Instead we load up with Modano's and Hudlers to the point that we HAVE to stay pat every year because we have no money to spend. That's what frustrates folks I think.
How come every trade deadline when someone suggests a player for the Wings all the Holland poodles come out and yap about how "successful" the team's been? Like adding a veteran Dman or goalie would totally disrupt everything and keep them from going deeper in the playoffs or possibly even winning the Cup.
The team is not perfect and neither is Holland, we don't have to hear his resume everytime a trade idea pops up.