Jump to content


cprice12's Photo

cprice12

Member Since 06 Jun 2002
Offline Last Active Sep 14 2013 12:15 AM
*----

#2240928 Cole suspended three games

Posted by cprice12 on 03 January 2012 - 08:32 AM

As I mentioned, I'm not overly upset with the suspension as it was a hit to the head. And if Abdelkader did slow down at the last moment, like Cole said, it's still a dangerous play.
But again, if Abdelkader didn't see Cole, then what was he doing with the puck? It looked to me like he slid the puck past the defense when he picked up Cole at the last moment, and was going to go get it after slipping past Cole...or he was just getting rid of the puck before getting hit. Obviously I'm reading into it some, but from playing hockey for 20 years, that's how I saw that play developing. If Abdelkader never saw Cole, he wouldn't have given up the puck like he did. From experience, I say Abdelkader saw Cole at the last moment and had enough time to react with the puck...and logic would also tell you that Abdelkader may have changed speeds as well.

Anyway, like I said, what I'm more annoyed with is the lack of a call on Datsyuk. You guys can spin that hit however you like, but Datsyuk lunged up and into Jackman's face on the hit. That's how I saw it. It should have at least been reviewed. If Shanny reviews it and deems it a legal hit, then ok...but at least review it as it was a hit to the head.
And I'm not sure why anyone is surprised or upset that Jackman was upset...he was hit in the face and wanted a call, and was pissed when he didn't get one. Not shocking there at all.

And as far as the crosschecks that Jackman gave Datsyuk, if you guys had read what I said earlier in the thread, or in the GDT...forgot which one...I said I have no idea why Jackman wasn't penalized for that..he should have been...bad no call. But that's not really the issue as what he did wasn't suspension worthy anyway. But if you want to get into "should have been penalties that aren't suspension worthy", we can go back to when Howard wrongly jumped on Perron a couple games back and gave him a shot or two to the face with no penalty at all.

We can debate this all day...maybe I'll just agree to disagree with you guys.


#2240734 Cole suspended three games

Posted by cprice12 on 02 January 2012 - 01:48 PM

No.

Dats got both the head and the body. Cole did not. This is a very important detail when supplemental disciple is applied. The Dats play is a 2 min minor (much like the Jackman cross-checks before the hit), and the Cole play is a suspension. Watch the NHL videos on suspendable/non-suspendable hits and you will see this differentiation.


According to Cole, he had Abdelkader lined up but Abdelkader moved at the last moment, exposing only his head to the check.
Those are Cole's words...and the replays back that up as it looks like Abdelkader tries to slide the puck by Cole and slip by him.
That should also be an important detail when discipline is applied. Which brings me back to my statement of the game being too fast to eliminate those types of hits, which is the goal by using suspensions against players who commit those hits. Players need to be aware of where they are on the ice. Abdelkader had his head down as he received a pass from behind in the neutral zone. He has to expect a hit there, like Shanny said. That's a suicide pass.

But whatever, I don't have a problem Cole being suspended as it was a hit to the head and that is the rule...I do have an issue with the number of games. Three seems excessive based on other suspensions this year for the same amount of games or less.

And until there is the same standard for suspensions on star players as there is for lesser known players, the system is severely flawed. The fact it was Datsyuk (annual Lady Byng candidate and superstar player) that threw the hit had a lot to do with him not getting a penalty and not getting a suspension. If Jackman hits Datsyuk like that, he gets a penalty and probably suspended.

And don't tell me that an elbow or shoulder to the head is ok as long as you get the body too. That's simply not the case. If the head targeted and the principal point of contact, it doesn't matter if contact with the body is made. Datsyuk lunged up into Jackman's face, hitting his head with his shoulder. I fail to see how Jackman's head wasn't targeted on that play. The Detroit announcers even said he threw a shoulder to his head.

Then how did Cole miss HIS ENTIRE BODY?


He had his head down, but picks up Cole at the last second as he tries to slide the puck by Cole and slip by him. That's how it looks to me.
If not, what was he trying to do with the puck if he never saw Cole?


#2240726 Cole suspended three games

Posted by cprice12 on 02 January 2012 - 01:14 PM

Jackman had his head down, end of story.

esteef


Abdelkader had his head down as well.


#2240709 Cole suspended three games

Posted by cprice12 on 02 January 2012 - 12:27 PM

If that is suspension worthy, then Datsyuk should have been suspended for his targeted hit to the head on Jackman.

Personally, I don't think either are suspension worthy on their own...but if Shanny deemed Cole's hit suspension worthy, then so was Datsyuk's. Both were shoulders that targeted the head. End of story.

Both Cole and Datsyuk's hits will never be taken out of the game. The game is far too fast and it is a rough, contact sport. These kinds of hits will always happen in the heat of the moment during play as players move at the last second when a check is coming and a shoulder hits a head.

The only way these hits can be taken out of the game is if they slow the game down by allowing clutching and grabbing, bring back the two line offsides pass, etc.

I understand the need to protect players from concussions, but I can't see these hits going away even with suspensions looming, because they aren't preventable with how the game is played now.


#2237810 Howard 5th in ASG voting in goalies

Posted by cprice12 on 21 December 2011 - 05:06 PM

Howard is young. If there is ever a time to ride him in his career it's now. And I would certainly say wins have more than very little importance when it comes to judging a goalie. It's not the only thing but when you combine how he has faced the 10th most shots in the league, and has the 5th best GAA, and has played the 4th most games as a goaltender this year, that adds up to a consistent rock solid goalie who can make a big save or two when the team needs it to get the win.


I'm not saying he hasn't played well. He's played very well.
But wins ALONE don't mean squat when judging how good a goalie is. Wins are a team stat. He could win every game 6-4 and have a horrible GAA and Save%, but be 25-0.

Based on stats, who wins the Vezina?
Goalie A: 58 starts, 39 wins, 2.25 GAA, .919 Save%.
Goalie B: 50 starts, 34 wins, 1.70 GAA, .940 Save%.

Young or not, every player gets fatigued at some point. And a young goalie starting significantly more games in a season than he ever has before, might be a cause for concern just because it's uncharted waters...especially if a long, grinding playoff run is the goal.


#2237801 Howard 5th in ASG voting in goalies

Posted by cprice12 on 21 December 2011 - 03:49 PM

Such bulls*** that he isn't on the ballot being the leader in wins at this juncture for f***'s sake.


Wins alone say very little about how well a goalie is playing. A goalie can rack up the wins with a 2.75 GAA as long as the team in front of him is scoring in bunches.

Howard's GAA and Save % say a lot more about his play.

Elliot has been the best goaltender in the NHL this year (leads the league in shutouts, GAA and Save %) and he's not on the ballot, nor is he getting any love from write in votes either...which is crazy and says a lot about how it's not about how good you are playing but how popular you are... but that's something I'm fine with...I'd rather he rest up.

You guys should probably be hoping Howard doesn't make the ASG. He's started 28 out of 32 games so far and is on pace to start 72 games this season...that's a lot...one could say that's too many. That would be far more than he has ever started in a season. He could use the rest I am sure.


#2237199 12/19 GDT : Red Wings 3 at Oilers 2

Posted by cprice12 on 19 December 2011 - 12:21 PM

Should be a good game and a W as well. We have to try and keep pace with Chicago as much as possible. Can't let them get too comfortable atop the division.


Maybe you should worry about passing St. Louis in the standings before concentrating on Chicago.

;)


#2234520 12/6 GDT : Red Wings 2 at Blues 3

Posted by cprice12 on 09 December 2011 - 02:44 PM

I've never seen a fanbase whine so much about a game they won.

Elliott COULD have gotten a diving penalty? More like it was a disgrace he didn't.


Not near as much of a disgrace as it was when Howard didn't get a penalty for attacking Perron.

And when a fan favorite and key member of the future of this team comes back from a year long absence due to a concussion, and in his 2nd game back he is wrongly attacked by a guy and has to dodge punches to his face...yeah, the fans are going to be a little upset that he wasn't penalized...it's not surprising they want to talk about it. I'd say it would be very strange for fans to not care about that incident and only care about the fact the Blues won.

Perron himself said he had to try to make sure he didn't catch one of the punches in the head.

But I guess I'm talking to a wall here. You guys have your blinders on.
Fair enough.


#2234457 12/6 GDT : Red Wings 2 at Blues 3

Posted by cprice12 on 09 December 2011 - 10:17 AM

I don't see any evidence that Stuart forced Perron into Howard. A nudge doesn't result in what Perron did. It was far worse than Abdelkader accidentally hitting Elliott in the head with an errant elbow and Elliott flopping like he got shot. I also noted Oshie was diving all night as well. The Blues looked a lot like the last two playoff series against the Sharks. The refs seemed to catch everything except the Blues diving and the interference in their own zone.

Nice "Red Wings suck" chant though while your rafters are empty. :thumbup:


Are you f'ing kidding me?
No evidence at all? :lol: How blind are you? Give me a break.
Both Stuart and Perron said contact couldn't be avoided. Perron was skating in front and Stuart checked him into Howard. It's not a difficult play to analyze at all if you objectively look at it without bias.

Elliot flopped back, sure...but that still doesn't change the fact Abdelkader drove into him pretty hard...without being pushed or directed into Elliot. Abdelkader deserved a penalty for being careless...and Elliot could have gotten a diving penalty if you want to get picky.
But hey, you guys are the experts on goalie dives...Hasek did play for you guys for a while.

And if you give Perron a penalty, you absolutly have to give Howard a penalty for jumping on top of Perron and taking a few shots. I don't think Blues fans would have been nearly as upset if Howard would have gotten a penalty as well and things evened out...but he didn't, and they didn't. So instead of one bad call on the play, there are two...a bad call and a bad no-call...which resulted in a goal for Detroit on the PP.

An absolute gift from the officials.


#2234455 12/6 GDT : Red Wings 2 at Blues 3

Posted by cprice12 on 09 December 2011 - 10:08 AM

Remember the last time the blues made the playoffs? Me neither...


New to the sport eh?

3 years ago.

And a couple years before that... does 25 years in a row ring a bell?


#2234453 12/6 GDT : Red Wings 2 at Blues 3

Posted by cprice12 on 09 December 2011 - 10:01 AM

Yes, I agree that this looks like a stupid comment after watching the replay. But in Jimmy's defense, he said this before he saw the replay. I'm guessing that watching replays before players are interviewed by the media almost never happens. If he had said this some time after the game, you would have an argument.


In Jimmy's defense? What?
That is my whole point.
Don't run your mouth until you are sure and have seen a replay. You just come off looking like a fool.
He could have said something along the lines of, "I haven't seen the replay yet, but I felt he took a run at me, so I reacted. I'll have to take a look and see what really happened."
That would have been a better way to go.

And I'm sure they put the replay up on the scoreboard. Players look up there quite often to see what transpired. He may have seen the replay and chose not to call out his defenseman for driving Perron into him.


#2233907 12/6 GDT : Red Wings 2 at Blues 3

Posted by cprice12 on 07 December 2011 - 12:48 PM

Stuart said as much in the press that it didn't look that bad.

I honestly I don't care if it was his fault or not. I'm happy with Jimmy going after guys that run into him. They should have to pay a price one way or another and in the heat of the moment it's hard for him to know how they toppled on top of him. Half the time when guys get bumped by defensemen they make sure to fall on the goalie.

And remember you're on a Wings site here. I think you make a valid case but the odds of people conceding the point here are slim, especially when you're being a bit of a smartass about it.

As for as Pronger's hit on Yzerman, of course he was going after him, but that's his job. I have no problem with that. I don't think Pronger was headhunting, but lowbridge my ass. Stevie saw Pronger coming at him arms and stick high, turned away from the play, but he was hardly even bent at the knees. And he stayed on his skates. That's not a lowbridge. What's Yzerman supposed to do, stand up straight and let Pronger crush him?

He went to hit Yzerman high and Stevie avoided the hit. Pronger physics worked against him on that one.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bb_fmWpcbag


My smartassness came as a response to someone being a smartass to me. So I was just playing along.

And you're wrong. Yzerman was bend over pretty much at 90 degrees when Pronger hit him. All you have to do is stop the video when they collide...which I did. I don't blame Yzerman for ducking the hit at all...but don't say he didn't low bridge Pronger...because Yzerman bent over at 90 degrees and making contact with Pronger's knee when Pronger went to hit him is indeed low-bridging. He didn't meant to hurt Pronger, I'm sure...it wasn't dirty...but it is what it is. He went low on Pronger. Period.


#2233893 12/6 GDT : Red Wings 2 at Blues 3

Posted by cprice12 on 07 December 2011 - 12:14 PM

ummm.....seen it. The onus is on Perron to do what he can to not hit the goalie, pushed or not. Period. Just because you get pushed, doesn't mean you can just let yourself go into the goalie, what's next, if someone pushes you offside, it's not really offside? But this is coming from a city and a fanbase, if you recall, that blamed Yzerman for Chris Pronger running at him, missing and destroying his knee that kept him out of the rest of the playoff round. All Yzerman did was duck, yet according to these same fans and media, Yzerman was at fault....damn those physics...

Uh, I have news for you...it's not a penalty if a defensive player checks an offensive player into the defense's goalie. Yes, the offensive player needs to avoid contact, but if he cannot avoid contact due to the check, then it is not a penalty. Bad call.
Perron couldn't avoid the collision at all, he was skating in front and then he was checked off balance and driven into Howard by Stuart.
Damn those physics.

Stuart's reaction tells you all you need to know.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RavZc_xIvz8

That doesn't look like the reaction of a defenseman who just saw his goalie get run. That's the reaction of a defenseman who just checked a guy into his own goalie and is hoping he isn't getting a penalty himself. Heck, it should have been interference on Stuart.

And as far as the Yzerman/Pronger play goes...it's funny how Wings fans/media say Pronger was headhunting and "going after" Yzerman on that play. He was going to check him...what a concept eh? Yzerman did have the puck afterall...but he ducked and took out Pronger's knee. It's not hard to see why some Blues fans would say Yzerman low-bridged Pronger. It was a bang-bang play and Yzerman went low on Pronger. Obviously both sides are going to view that play differently.


#2233886 12/6 GDT : Red Wings 2 at Blues 3

Posted by cprice12 on 07 December 2011 - 11:28 AM

"Iím not taking that. I donít care who it is," Howard said. "If youíre going to run me like that or try to go through me like that, youíre going to pay the price."


That's the quote I'm referring to.
He just sounds like an idiot because Perron didn't "run him".
His own guy was the cause of the issue, not Perron.

Check out a replay before you run your mouth to the press.


#2233871 12/6 GDT : Red Wings 2 at Blues 3

Posted by cprice12 on 07 December 2011 - 10:55 AM

Howard felt he got run and defended himself. That isn't bush league at all.

Did you say the same thing when Miller went after Tootoo?

Also, if St. Louis sports talk is focused on a single penalty when they were the beneficiary of plenty of ridiculous calls THEIR way which came in a game THEY WON, your city has some issues.


A goalie wrongly going after Perron, who just came back from a year out due to a concussion, and punching him numerous times while he was down on his back, was uncalled for. The Perron comeback is the talk of the town. It wasn't just a single penalty...it was a non-call on a goalie who went after our guy, who just came back from a concussion, by punching him in the head numerous times.

But I can understand the situation from Howard's point of view. I disagree with him, but I get it...he felt he got ran, fine. But use your brain and look at who you are going after. Can you imagine the media coverage if Howard went after Crosby like that, punching him in the head? After he came back from his concussion? They'd be all over it.

HOWEVER, my main problem with Howard was his comments after the game...they were assholish...especially if he saw the replay (which he may not have at the time...if not, he needs to look at it before running his mouth to the press). Perron was not at fault at all.

I had no problem with Miller going after Tootoo...he's a POS and Miller has every right to feel Tootoo did it on purpoase, that's who Tootoo is. HOWEVER, it looked to me like Tootoo tried to jump over Miller but failed. I don't think he was headhunting...but that doesn't mean it wasn't a reckless/careless play. Miller was in the right. Howard wasn't.