NHL 2010-11 Season Discussion Thread (1 Viewer)

[Jeff Gatie]

Seguin has been good, not outstanding. He's a rookie. Breakaway speed that bests that of Kessel, a release that rivals any in the league, and smarts that can't be taught. A little lost defensively. A little soft (but not Kessel soft) but he's willing to get dirty (unlike Kessel). He's 18 years old, so he's a boy amongst men. But the raw talent is there to be a step below Crosby and Ovechkin (a big step, but just a step), befitting his #2 status. Certainly he's got the goods to be a bargain if swapped for Kessel straight up, never mind with a #2 and another #1. Long story short - The Leafs got hosed.

 

[Ockeghem]

Originally Posted by Jeff Gatie

It was in the playoffs in 1970, so it probably was the same game. I was 5 years old, my Dad got the tickets from a guy at work, and I distinctly remember him bringing the tickets home and showing me at the supper table. Don't remember much about the game, but through the years my father filled in the memories of the hat trick and fight.

Jeff,


Just think, even though you were only five, you've seen a game played by the Big, Bad Bruins. They inspired me to play (and eventually love) street hockey. And they inspired me to read -- I loved that book. What a great team, and era, that was. I only wish I had been able to see the great teams from the 1950s and 1960s as well.





BTW, another good win for the Bruins last night.

 

[Scott Merryfield]

Originally Posted by Jeff Gatie

Seguin has been good, not outstanding. He's a rookie. Breakaway speed that bests that of Kessel, a release that rivals any in the league, and smarts that can't be taught. A little lost defensively. A little soft (but not Kessel soft) but he's willing to get dirty (unlike Kessel). He's 18 years old, so he's a boy amongst men. But the raw talent is there to be a step below Crosby and Ovechkin (a big step, but just a step), befitting his #2 status. Certainly he's got the goods to be a bargain if swapped for Kessel straight up, never mind with a #2 and another #1. Long story short - The Leafs got hosed.

Thanks, Jeff. IMO, Seguin was a "young" 18 and could have used more seasoning instead of being thrust right into the NHL. He only had 1.5 years in the juniors, and didn't get the experience of playing in the World Junior Championships, which could have helped his development. However, the league's agreement with the OHL did tie Boston's hands some -- their choices were basically to either keep him in the NHL, or send him back to Plymouth in the OHL. The AHL wasn't an option.


Your assessment of his skills does pretty much match what I saw during his junior play here. He was an excellent puck handler, play maker and skater, very aware of where everyone was on the ice, but a little weak defensively and not someone who would go into the corners to dig the puck out. He was compared to a young Steve Yzerman here last season.


Anyway, I agree that Boston did rob the Leafs blind in that trade.

 

[Jeff Gatie]

Scott, I still have my copy of Orr on Ice, his book on hockey skills. It has a set of pictures on how to put on gear which was the inspiration for my brother and I never wearing socks under our skates. Bobby never wore them because he felt the ice better without them. I don't know if I felt the ice better, but it sounded good to me.

 

[phil*]

Originally Posted by Jeff Gatie
Hockey is the best spectator sport there is!

Well,what do you know? You and I actually agree on something,Jeff! LOL

 

[Ockeghem]

Originally Posted by Jeff Gatie

Scott, I still have my copy of Orr on Ice, his book on hockey skills. It has a set of pictures on how to put on gear which was the inspiration for my brother and I never wearing socks under our skates. Bobby never wore them because he felt the ice better without them. I don't know if I felt the ice better, but it sounded good to me.

Jeff,


Interesting. I actually wore two (and sometimes three!) pair of socks under my skates, because as a teenager, I thought that the added support would help to keep my ankles straight. Out of the four 'major' sports (baseball, basketball, football, and hockey), I still find ice hockey to be the most difficult to play. But I'll tell you this: when I go to an indoor (non-ice) skating rink with my children, my roller-blading skills are fine, because of the training I received in ice skating. However, roller skates are pretty much out of the question for me.

 

[phil*]

This is one of my all time favorite Sports Illustrated Covers. I suspect Jeff Gatie doesn't share my affinity for it.

 

[Scott Merryfield]

Nice cover, Phil. It's good to have another Habs fan here. I always feel outnumbered around all these Bruins fans.

 

[phil*]

Did Zdeno Chara "guide" Max Pacioretti's head into the stanchion? What say you?

 

[Jeff Gatie]

I've seen other angles and his arm never contacts his head. But really, who cares? The league ruled, it's over. Matt Cooke probably ended Marc Savard's career and got zero games for a much more vicious hit. Paccioretti himself almost ended a guy's career with a hit from behind. It's hockey, and that hit into the stanchions happens all the time. I've taken (and given) a few myself. Maybe if the Bell Centre didn't brace those stanchions with heavy glass in between, like 95% of the other rinks, he'd be skating away with no injury. I sympathize with him and his family, nobody wants to see anyone hurt. Lord knows ive seen my share of motionless B's on the ice. But this wasn't an international incident, it wasn't even Todd Bertuzzi. It was a bad combination of hitting, size and speed. If you want to take hitting, size and speed out of the game, then they might as well play soccer. Besides, despite what Habs fans are bleating about Chara's reputation, he's more a gentle giant when not fighting. Zero suspensions ever for someone that big does not a monster make.

 

[phil*]

Originally Posted by Jeff Gatie

I've seen other angles and his arm never contacts his head. But really, who cares?

Do you have a photo which shows there was no contact between Chara's arm and Pacioretti's head? If this was true, I guess you're implying that Paccioretti's head flew into the stanchion of its own accord. I think the photo is pretty incriminating.

 

[Jeff Gatie]

Watch this video from the 1 minute mark on. It's a reverse view and it shows Chara's arm never touches his head. Matter of fact, Pacioretty's head is already in contact with the stanchion well before Chara's arm comes up.






Also see the 1:24 mark on. It's a head on view and it too clearly shows his arm was on Pacioretty's shoulder the whole time.

 

[Jeff Gatie]

So phil, after viewing the actual video, are you still convinced that picture is "incriminating?" By the way, I find it quite telling that I saw that picture all over the net, but not one from an angle which shows that Chara never touched Pacioretty's head. That, the Parliament moves, the police calls and the sheer stupidity of Air Canada's sudden "stance" are the most absurd things I've seen in 40+ years of watching hockey, and I saw the rat induced blackout at a Cup final.

 

[Scott Merryfield]

It's also absurd that Chara is getting off with no suspension for the hit. Players at this level are well aware of where they are on the ice at all times, and Chara is clearly looking at the stanchions as he rides Pacioretty into the boards. Players are supposedly responsible for knowing where they are -- no checking from behind when an opponent is just away from the boards is an example. The NHL blew a perfect chance to show it is serious about player safety.


One other thing I do not understand is why is that small section of glass even there between the two benches? It doesn't offer much protection to anyone, but creates the potential for just the sort of situation that caused this severe injury. The rink for our local Ontario Hockey League team doesn't have any glass between the two benches, and it's a regulation NHL rink.


The last two games between Montreal and Boston have been very ugly, and I think the next one will be even worse.

 

[phil*]

Originally Posted by Jeff Gatie



Also see the 1:24 mark on. It's a head on view and it too clearly shows his arm was on Pacioretty's shoulder the whole time.

Actually,video CONFIRMS glove to Pacioretty's head. Here's a better look. "Matter of fact, Pacioretty's head is already in contact with the stanchion well before Chara's arm comes up." OH REALLY?

"

 

[Jeff Gatie]

No phil, his arm is on his shoulder. That's Pacioretty's jersey under his arm. Unless Chara's hand can bend freakishly left, past his shoulder pad, all the way to his head, Chara is not in contact with his head. But you know that phil, because you saw the video from 1 minute on, which follows the hit from start to finish, and Chara never makes contact with his head. Right phil? Unless you can tell me exactly when in the video Chara hits his head? Feel free to post any screenshot from the reverse angle you wish, phil.


Now to be honest, I thought he'd get 2 games. I texted a friend just that after the hit. But it was not a hit to the head, no matter how many misleading photos phil posts.

 

[Jeff Gatie]

Scott, I thought there would be a suspension. But similar to the Savard hit (at that time) Chara's hit was not against the rules. He didn't target the head, he didn't blindside him, it was a basic interference call if not for the stanchion. Going by the often daft and incomprehensible letter of NHL law, it was not suspendable. Thats why I say let it go. It will never make sense, it didn't with Savard and it wont in this case either. Hey, at least Pacioretty is up and about, Savard was in bed in a dark room for months, as was Bergeron. Also, at least he didn't have his career ended by a POS cheap shot artist like Matt Cooke. By all accounts Chara is a class act, and a Norris winner to boot. Not much solace, and you probably have a different opinion, but I think we can both agree he isn't Matt Cooke. By the way Scott, you are one of the most reasonable Habs fans I know. Can you please explain to phil that the video I linked to shows Chara never touched his head? Despite overwhelming evidence, phil has a little trouble seeing the truth sometimes,

 

[phil*]

Originally Posted by Jeff Gatie

 

[Jeff Gatie]

phil, I asked you to show me where you see him contact the head in the reverse angle video, which is from above, and has the best perspective for showing head contact. You have done nothing but show pictures and videos from the side, which is the worst angle for showing contact to the head. I surmise from this that you have no interest in the truth, you only seek to further the hysteria. A pattern I've gotten quite used to. So I ask again, in the reverse angle video, exactly when do you see head contact? No side angles, no hysteria inducing propaganda videos. Show me in the reverse angle replay exactly where contact is made with the head.

 

[Scott Merryfield]

While no one truly knows what a player is thinking, I doubt that Chara's intent was to injure Pacioretty, as Chara does not have a history of such behavior. However, I think the NHL needs to make players more responsible for their actions when they are involved in a dangerous play in an unsafe area of the ice or the opponent is in an obviously vulnerable position, especially when it results in such a serious injury. Instead, they stick their heads in the sand too many times and players careers and long term health are put in jeopardy. Jeff mentioned the Marc Savard incident as another good example, so my opinion is not solely based on this injury to a Habs player.


The NFL recognized they had an issue with head injuries and changed the way they officiated the game and handed out fines/suspensions to deal with the issue. While I think the NFL went too far with their changes, the NHL is guilty of the exact opposite in ignoring the problems that are occurring on the ice.


Slightly on topic: at the Plymouth Whalers OHL game vs. Windsor last weekend, a "check to the head" penalty was called twice within 8 seconds -- once to each team. None of us sitting in the section ever recalled hearing such a penalty ever being called before -- even in an NHL game (the OHL mimics almost all NHL rules). I was surprised to read later that this rule was added a couple of years ago. I just never remember hearing it called. It was so odd to hear it twice on two different plays 8 seconds apart.