As good as Couturier has been recently once again Giroux is having another statistically solid season.

Wanted to bring this up as I argued with a "Philly sports fan" over the weekend about how Giroux is not a shell of his best days.

He currently has 73 points in 68 games and is a +14 and is on pace for roughly 90 points. If he hits that total it will be his 3 season of 90 or more points.

It's ridiculous when I talk to the WIP type people out there and how they rag on G.
- opeth_pa

I've been very impressed with G the last two years. The only worry I have is how long will he be able to keep this up before he regresses? So far I am happy with Fletch in that he hasn't gone crazy trading picks and young players for a quick fix. Hextall laid the groundwork, and we have cap space to go after some smart UFAs this summer without blocking any up and comers. If he can execute this correctly, I hope they progress to a sure fire top 3 seed in the div instead of a bubble team. With Hart, I think they can.

I'm normally in agreement on things with you Bill but I can't agree with this. My read on the play was the Boychuk was going to come in to seal off the wall on a pinch. I don't think he was ignoring the puck and coming in for a big hit when he knew the puck wasn't going to be there. Either way, it's just speculation and I don't see how it can be ruled on what we think was going to happen. I think it's reasonable for Voracek to think he was going to be hit but he had other options t avoid a hit if that's what he thinks was going to happen. He could've skated deeper in towards the puck, he could've moved to side step the hit. Instead he chose to go at Boychuk and raise his back up making direct contect with the head. It's a suspendable play in my view.




I agree with this completely.
- MJL

How do you knowingly hit someone with YOUR BACK, with the intention to injure? Not targeting you just asking in general.

You're allowed to defend yourself with your body in certain circumstances.

You're never allowed to defend yourself by swinging your stick in the NHL.
- Feanor

You're allowed to defend yourself if you do so in a legal manner.

How do you knowingly hit someone with YOUR BACK, with the intention to injure? Not targeting you just asking in general.
- youarewrong

defending yourself is now intent to injure

How do you knowingly hit someone with YOUR BACK, with the intention to injure? Not targeting you just asking in general.
- youarewrong

I haven't with any of my opinions stated that Voracek intended to injure Boychuk. It's pretty clear on the video how Voracek elevates himself into Boychuk.

I haven't with any of my opinions stated that Voracek intended to injure Boychuk. It's pretty clear on the video how Voracek elevates himself into Boychuk.
- MJL

Skates never leave the ice. He obviously bends his knees and powers into the hit, but it's not a 'high hit'. Boychuk also skating in, legs wide, chin out. There's no shoulder (like Eichel). No elbow. No stick.

Head contact there is incidental. That by itself should negate supplemental discipline.

So were back to you telling me what I can do again? If you don't want to engage in conversation, why reply? ...
- MJL

“Don’t bother” is an expression of exasperation. “Voracek” was stated telling you that I understand your viewpoint which you explained in-depth yesterday.

I didn’t tell you what you could or could not do. The wording was chosen to convey the feelings of disagreement and show an understanding of your view.

My reply was addressing the suspension not the play.

I find your questions above offensive. You making this poop up and attacking me is disrespectful. I take exception to it.

You say what you want. Or continue to ignore me. Whatever. Please.

Fellas. Jake saw Boychuk coming and moved into his path before the puck got there (hence the interference call). While I don't believe he intended to injure Boychuk, he absolutely initiated contact. Instead of waiting for Boychuk to (possibly) hit him.

I've seen Jake and Coots deliver these hits for the past two years, but usually way more subtle then this. The puck was still about 3 feet away from both players.

My issue is with the inconsistency of the suspension not the call or Jake's actions. Jake was not "bracing" himself for contact. Jake got the interference call, that should have been end of story. This suspension is BS but let's not try and defend Jake's actions.

Fellas. Jake saw Boychuk coming and moved into his path before the puck got there (hence the interference call). While I don't believe he intended to injure Boychuk, he absolutely initiated contact. Instead of waiting for Boychuk to (possibly) hit him.

I've seen Jake and Coots deliver these hits for the past two years, but usually way more subtle then this. The puck was still about 3 feet away from both players.

My issue is with the inconsistency of the suspension not the call or Jake's actions. Jake was not "bracing" himself for contact. Jake got the interference call, that should have been end of story. This suspension is BS but let's not try and defend Jake's actions.
- cdearth23

I can actually stomach 1 game, 2 doesn't make sense. For all, don't tell me "are you really questioning the league about 2 instead of 1"? yes I am. The only way it should be 2 is if Jake had a history or there was proof he intended to injure. Everything about Jake and his play say he thought he was defending himself, he was wrong, that gets you 1 game.

Fellas. Jake saw Boychuk coming and moved into his path before the puck got there (hence the interference call). While I don't believe he intended to injure Boychuk, he absolutely initiated contact. Instead of waiting for Boychuk to (possibly) hit him.

I've seen Jake and Coots deliver these hits for the past two years, but usually way more subtle then this. The puck was still about 3 feet away from both players.

My issue is with the inconsistency of the suspension not the call or Jake's actions. Jake was not "bracing" himself for contact. Jake got the interference call, that should have been end of story. This suspension is BS but let's not try and defend Jake's actions.
- cdearth23

F E L L A S

I can actually stomach 1 game, 2 doesn't make sense. For all, don't tell me "are you really questioning the league about 2 instead of 1"? yes I am. The only way it should be 2 is if Jake had a history or there was proof he intended to injure. Everything about Jake and his play say he thought he was defending himself, he was wrong, that gets you 1 game.
- wcorvette

Agreed. Hopefully, NHL allows him to play Thursday (1 game suspension). I honestly don't believe (IMO, of course) that Jake is innocent in this. He surprised the hell out of Boychuk with that "hit." Got him high and it was a hard impact (due to the fact that Boychuk was almost at full speed). Jake does the same "back check" from time to time but usually the he has the puck or is taking possession of the puck and defender is right on him.

Interference, yes. Suspension, should be NO. Two games warranted, hell no. Blame Player Safety all we want for the suspension, but Jake is not innocent in this. Major penalty should have been the end of story though.

Skates never leave the ice. He obviously bends his knees and powers into the hit, but it's not a 'high hit'. Boychuk also skating in, legs wide, chin out. There's no shoulder (like Eichel). No elbow. No stick.

Head contact there is incidental. That by itself should negate supplemental discipline.
- Tomahawk

The replays I've seen show that the head is the principal point of contact in my opinion.

“Don’t bother” is an expression of exasperation. “Voracek” was stated telling you that I understand your viewpoint which you explained in-depth yesterday.

I didn’t tell you what you could or could not do. The wording was chosen to convey the feelings of disagreement and show an understanding of your view.

My reply was addressing the suspension not the play.

I find your questions above offensive. You making this poop up and attacking me is disrespectful. I take exception to it.

You say what you want. Or continue to ignore me. Whatever. Please.
- NC Flyers Fan

My apologies for offending you. I was not aware that telling someone don't bother to reply meant I understand your opinion.

I dont know what I look forward to more:

SMS' game predictions
or
Flyerz4life's link to his thoughts on the game

I dont know what I look forward to more:

SMS' game predictions
or
Flyerz4life's link to his thoughts on the game
- KINGKENZO

i look forward to your responses to any of them

The replays I've seen show that the head is the principal point of contact in my opinion.
- MJL

I see they are appealing jakes suspension but he's sitting out tonight. The team prob hopes its reduced to 1 game. Try to win without him tonight and have him back vs wash. They're conceding he deserves a 1 game suspension but I Hope that's what happens.

My apologies for offending you. I was not aware that telling someone don't bother to reply meant I understand your opinion.
- MJL

Bolded is your made up poop. Also not what I said. My words are meant to be viewed in context. “Don’t even bother repeating your view—Voracek.” We had a long discussion yesterday. I remember your opinion. If you wanted to repeat it, fine. I was letting you know you didn’t need to do it for my benefit, I understand your view. And still disagree.

Bolded is your made up poop. Also not what I said. My words are meant to be viewed in context. “Don’t even bother repeating your view—Voracek.” We had a long discussion yesterday. I remember your opinion. If you wanted to repeat it, fine. I was letting you know you didn’t need to do it for my benefit, I understand your view. And still disagree.
- NC Flyers Fan

It's not made up it's paraphrasing. I took your wording incorrectly.

It's not made up it's paraphrasing. I took your wording incorrectly.
- MJL

It’s called twisting words. The difference is the meaning. It is also a unhealthy tactic in debate.

So, how about those Phillies, huh?

So, how about those Phillies, huh?
- Scoob

They're tryna be the Maple Leafs of the MLB. Gotta win games 7-6 with that pitching, outside of Nola

The replays I've seen show that the head is the principal point of contact in my opinion.
- MJL

The Eichel hit is worthy of a DPOS review. Head is the principle (and sole) point of contact.

The Jake hit looks nothing like that. He doesn't pick his head, the guy is barreling toward him, and led with his face.

Yet same suspension.

Not sure what Gordon's thought process is here in starting Elliott tonight... We really gonna throw Hart straight into the fire against the Caps after a few weeks off?

Not sure what Gordon's thought process is here in starting Elliott tonight... We really gonna throw Hart straight into the fire against the Caps after a few weeks off?
- bulet13

Probably that Elliott has played solid and right now the most important game on the schedule is tonight vs the Sens .

Not sure what Gordon's thought process is here in starting Elliott tonight... We really gonna throw Hart straight into the fire against the Caps after a few weeks off?
- bulet13

I doubt it matters to Hart who his first/next opponent is. He just wants to be in the crease.