(1) New York Rangers vs (8) Ottawa Senators - Playoffs Round 1

tim1_2 wrote:In the spirit of "Old Time Hockey", we should wear our heritage jerseys tonight.

Riprock wrote:

rooneypoo wrote:

tim1_2 wrote:

rooneypoo wrote:

tim1_2 wrote:The Alfie has confirmed he suffered a concussion. He says he will be a game-time decision tonight.

If Alfie is out because of this, I want a Sens player to crush a NYR head -- Richards, Gaborik, or Callahan. Alfie for Hagelin is not even close to a fair trade off.

The NHL needs a better mechanism to deal with this stuff in the playoffs. It's too easy to send a goon or lesser player after a star in an attempt to hurt him. Teams will keep doing this stuff as long as it's clear that it provides them with an advantage, which it clearly does. Sure, take the offending player out -- but if the victim is taken out because of the dirty play, then slap the team with a substantial fine, make that fine count against next year's cap, and make them sit a player of roughly equal value for the duration of the victim's injury.

Make the consequences of the action matter, and you will see a reduction in this nonsense.

I understand the logic behind your proposal (eye for an eye), but it will never be implemented.

Also, the players' union would have big issues with it. They don't want the cap being f'd with, and they don't want more people being suspended. I think the thing that would make the biggest difference is bigger fines. Yeah, suspend a guy for a few games, but ALSO be able to fine him beyond the salary he will lose. For instance, a guy sits 5 games, loses $50,000 in salary, but ALSO can be fined a matching amount to the salary lost (i.e. an additional $50k).

Of course, the players union would never accept that either...so longer suspensions seems to be the only available penalty.

The mechanics of the thing I'm not decided on, but the necessity of severe consequences for a TEAM whose player intentionally injures an opposing team's player is one that I am. This Dung is happening because teams recognize that taking out an opposing team's top player is well worth having a plug / goon suspended for a few games.

Make the consequences of the crime adequate to the crime, and you will see a substantial decrease in this kind of activity. Intentionally taking out star players on an opposing team through dirty head shots and reckless plays ought not to be an acceptable strategy in the NHL. They need rules in place that reflect that.

People say removing the instigator is the solution. But then I ask, if an opposing player makes a good, legal, hard hit that may or may not injure a star player, what's to stop a tough guy from attacking him?

Here's a radical solution: if a star player is injured and forced to miss X games, the other team's equally star player (i.e. a C for a C, W, for a W, D for a D, etc) cannot play.

rooneypoo wrote:?

Pretty sure that that's exactly what I suggested above...

tim1_2 wrote:

SeawaySensFan wrote:

Hoags wrote:

SeawaySensFan wrote:Looks like young Winchester is back where he belongs, on the top line.

Just keeping the spot warm for Silfverberg ...

Source?

Earliest Silf will play here is Saturday, if his team wins the series tomorrow evening. I would guess he only gets inserted into the lineup if Ottawa is down in the series at that point.

Vandelay wrote:

tim1_2 wrote:

SeawaySensFan wrote:

Hoags wrote:

SeawaySensFan wrote:Looks like young Winchester is back where he belongs, on the top line.

Just keeping the spot warm for Silfverberg ...

Source?

Earliest Silf will play here is Saturday, if his team wins the series tomorrow evening. I would guess he only gets inserted into the lineup if Ottawa is down in the series at that point.

I'm really nervous about throwing him in to a series like this. I know they say he's more than ready but man, what a way to start your NHL career...talk about "sink or swim" time. Hope he's got his head on a swivel.

wprager wrote:
Third line, tops, to start, and only after a couple of practices. If he works out, consider moving him up. That's all.

Vandelay wrote:

tim1_2 wrote:

SeawaySensFan wrote:

Hoags wrote:

SeawaySensFan wrote:Looks like young Winchester is back where he belongs, on the top line.

Just keeping the spot warm for Silfverberg ...

Source?

Earliest Silf will play here is Saturday, if his team wins the series tomorrow evening. I would guess he only gets inserted into the lineup if Ottawa is down in the series at that point.

I'm really nervous about throwing him in to a series like this. I know they say he's more than ready but man, what a way to start your NHL career...talk about "sink or swim" time. Hope he's got his head on a swivel.

SeawaySensFan wrote:

Vandelay wrote:

tim1_2 wrote:

SeawaySensFan wrote:

Hoags wrote:

SeawaySensFan wrote:Looks like young Winchester is back where he belongs, on the top line.

Just keeping the spot warm for Silfverberg ...

Source?

Earliest Silf will play here is Saturday, if his team wins the series tomorrow evening. I would guess he only gets inserted into the lineup if Ottawa is down in the series at that point.

I'm really nervous about throwing him in to a series like this. I know they say he's more than ready but man, what a way to start your NHL career...talk about "sink or swim" time. Hope he's got his head on a swivel.

This is all about the kids and the future. Let's enjoy the short, meaningless ride of experience gaining for the future kids of Ottawa.

rooneypoo wrote:

Riprock wrote:

rooneypoo wrote:

tim1_2 wrote:

rooneypoo wrote:

tim1_2 wrote:The Alfie has confirmed he suffered a concussion. He says he will be a game-time decision tonight.

If Alfie is out because of this, I want a Sens player to crush a NYR head -- Richards, Gaborik, or Callahan. Alfie for Hagelin is not even close to a fair trade off.

The NHL needs a better mechanism to deal with this stuff in the playoffs. It's too easy to send a goon or lesser player after a star in an attempt to hurt him. Teams will keep doing this stuff as long as it's clear that it provides them with an advantage, which it clearly does. Sure, take the offending player out -- but if the victim is taken out because of the dirty play, then slap the team with a substantial fine, make that fine count against next year's cap, and make them sit a player of roughly equal value for the duration of the victim's injury.

Make the consequences of the action matter, and you will see a reduction in this nonsense.

I understand the logic behind your proposal (eye for an eye), but it will never be implemented.

Also, the players' union would have big issues with it. They don't want the cap being f'd with, and they don't want more people being suspended. I think the thing that would make the biggest difference is bigger fines. Yeah, suspend a guy for a few games, but ALSO be able to fine him beyond the salary he will lose. For instance, a guy sits 5 games, loses $50,000 in salary, but ALSO can be fined a matching amount to the salary lost (i.e. an additional $50k).

Of course, the players union would never accept that either...so longer suspensions seems to be the only available penalty.

The mechanics of the thing I'm not decided on, but the necessity of severe consequences for a TEAM whose player intentionally injures an opposing team's player is one that I am. This Dung is happening because teams recognize that taking out an opposing team's top player is well worth having a plug / goon suspended for a few games.

Make the consequences of the crime adequate to the crime, and you will see a substantial decrease in this kind of activity. Intentionally taking out star players on an opposing team through dirty head shots and reckless plays ought not to be an acceptable strategy in the NHL. They need rules in place that reflect that.

People say removing the instigator is the solution. But then I ask, if an opposing player makes a good, legal, hard hit that may or may not injure a star player, what's to stop a tough guy from attacking him?

Here's a radical solution: if a star player is injured and forced to miss X games, the other team's equally star player (i.e. a C for a C, W, for a W, D for a D, etc) cannot play.

?

Pretty sure that that's exactly what I suggested above...

Riprock wrote:Anyone catch that Konopka was fiend $2500 and the Senators $10000 for Konopka chirping the Ranger player while he was being interviewed prior to game 2?

shabbs wrote:Imagine if Game 2 was your first NHL game ever...

22_4_ever wrote:

wprager wrote:
Third line, tops, to start, and only after a couple of practices. If he works out, consider moving him up. That's all.

You don't put a player like Silfverberg on the third line, especially in a series like this that is starting to get nasty. You're just asking for the kid to be destroyed. If he's ready to play, then he's ready to play on your 2nd or 1st line! Otherwise he isn't ready to play. He isn't a 3rd or 4th line player, so don't put him in that role.