First.
- nfph

Disagree

And as you could guess, same here. Been watching him his entire career. And until I see cut-and-dry dirty plays, he won't be a dirty player. He plays with an edge, always near the top in hits, and forces a lot of opposing fans to hate him. So be it.
- cryptical77

All teams have those players. Sabres have Ott and Kaleta, Wild have Clutterbuck, Kings have Brown, players that play "on the edge" shouldn't be given the benefit of the doubt when plays like this occur, an elbow to the face of a player who doesn't have the puck is just that, an elbow to the face of a player who doesn't have the puck

Disagree
- jochfr

You would.

All teams have those players. Sabres have Ott and Kaleta, Wild have Clutterbuck, Kings have Brown, players that play "on the edge" shouldn't be given the benefit of the doubt when plays like this occur, an elbow to the face of a player who doesn't have the puck is just that, an elbow to the face of a player who doesn't have the puck
- sbroads24

So should MDZ have been suspended when he hit James Neal with an elbow?

All teams have those players. Sabres have Ott and Kaleta, Wild have Clutterbuck, Kings have Brown, players that play "on the edge" shouldn't be given the benefit of the doubt when plays like this occur, an elbow to the face of a player who doesn't have the puck is just that, an elbow to the face of a player who doesn't have the puck
- sbroads24

and to think, last season we could have traded Pommer for Brown.

So should MDZ have been suspended when he hit James Neal with an elbow?
- jmatchett383

Yep, he swung his arm around with the intention of holding Neal up from getting around him on the other side. It was an unneccessary elbow.

Just like this Brown hit. All he has to do is tuck his arm and lead with his shoulder. Why the hell did he raise his elbow and launch into the player with it?

This is coming 2 nights after he chicken wing'd one of the Stars players with a dirty elbow. He shouldnt have even been playing in this game.

This is coming 2 nights after he chicken wing'd one of the Stars players with a dirty elbow. He shouldnt have even been playing in this game.
- theblueandgold

agreed. way worse of a hit.

discuss...

discuss...


- battelmt

Context is a female dog isn't it? If you take a still of his shot to Sedin in the playoffs last year, it's a blatant hit to the head to a player that doesn't have the puck. Put it in context, and it's Sedin's fault for pulling up short and turning into him.



Edit: Also, in your picture, Brown's elbow isn't even raised to his own neck level, so it doesn't appear he raised and threw it into Pommer's head. It was a careless, reckless play, not a malicious one. 2 games, be done with it.

Disagree
- jochfr

You cut me deep, joch.

and to think, last season we could have traded Pommer for Brown.
- qcstudios

link?

You cut me deep, joch.
- nfph

Don't drip on those new floors

Nice job

And as you could guess, same here. Been watching him his entire career. And until I see cut-and-dry dirty plays, he won't be a dirty player. He plays with an edge, always near the top in hits, and forces a lot of opposing fans to hate him. So be it.
- cryptical77

Don't disagree, Browns a good player. The problem is, what will your take be when it's an opposing player knocking Brown out for any number of games on a questionable play? Especially when it's a player that continuessly goes unpunished for these types of plays? I think you'd be singing a different tune had someone like Clutterbuck taken out Kopitar on a reckless play in that game. All I'm saying is, it's easy to stand by your player when he's the one getting away scott free from a play that should have at the very least been penalized on the ice.

LA fans were screaming for blood last season when Brodziak took Kopitar into the boards and ended up getting a major and a match penalty on a play that was no where near as agregious. Kopitar sold the penalty by laying on the ice for a few minutes and never even left the game.

All teams have those players. Sabres have Ott and Kaleta, Wild have Clutterbuck, Kings have Brown, players that play "on the edge" shouldn't be given the benefit of the doubt when plays like this occur, an elbow to the face of a player who doesn't have the puck is just that, an elbow to the face of a player who doesn't have the puck
- sbroads24

Exactly!

I will check 'fact' this for you

EDIT: For your reading pleaseure:

http://www.diebytheblade....-how-good-is-thomas-vanek
- RynoBull

Ryno, why are you linking me with an article to support your argument that was written in Nov 2011 before the 11-12 season even ended, using projections based on Vanek's hot streak at the beginning of the year? We all know how last season turned out.

Here, lets "fact check" my statement:

2012-13: 37 GP, 16 scoreless = 43%
2011-12: 78 GP, 33 scoreless = 42%
2010-11: 80 GP, 33 scoreless = 41%
2009-10: 71 GP, 33 scoreless = 46%
2008-09: 73 GP, 31 scoreless = 42%
2007-08: 82 GP, 40 scoreless = 49%
2006-07: 82 GP, 29 scoreless = 35%
2005-06: 81 GP, 44 scoreless = 54%

On average, Vanek goes scoreless in 44% of games played in a season. Like I said yesterday, you need your best player to be getting points in 70% (+/- 5%) of games played. Vanek did that in 06-07 and he wasnt even our best player. I guess the argument that hes "not consistent" isnt a good argument, because hes obviously consistent. He has hot streaks to the start the season, cools off tremendously down the stretch and you can count on him going scoreless in 44% of games played.

We could only imagine where this team would be if he was able to be consistent with his 06-07 numbers, scoring in at or around 65% of games played.

Ryno, why are you linking me with an article to support your argument that was written in Nov 2011 before the 11-12 season even ended, using projections based on Vanek's hot streak at the beginning of the year? We all know how last season turned out.

Here, lets "fact check" my statement:

2012-13: 37 GP, 16 scoreless = 43%
2011-12: 78 GP, 33 scoreless = 42%
2010-11: 80 GP, 33 scoreless = 41%
2009-10: 71 GP, 33 scoreless = 46%
2008-09: 73 GP, 31 scoreless = 42%
2007-08: 82 GP, 40 scoreless = 49%
2006-07: 82 GP, 29 scoreless = 35%
2005-06: 81 GP, 44 scoreless = 54%

On average, Vanek goes scoreless in 44% of games played in a season. Like I said yesterday, you need your best player to be getting points in 70% (+/- 5%) of games played. Vanek did that in 06-07 and he wasnt even our best player. I guess the argument that hes "not consistent" isnt a good argument, because hes obviously consistent. He has hot streaks to the start the season, cools off tremendously down the stretch and you can count on him going scoreless in 44% of games played.

We could only imagine where this team would be if he was able to be consistent with his 06-07 numbers, scoring in at or around 65% of games played.
- theblueandgold

To quote a great Saturday Night Love skit: "it was to my understanding that there would not be any math".... may have embellished it a bit... Chevy Chase doing President Harold Ford. LMAO

Ryno, why are you linking me with an article to support your argument that was written in Nov 2011 before the 11-12 season even ended, using projections based on Vanek's hot streak at the beginning of the year? We all know how last season turned out.

Here, lets "fact check" my statement:

2012-13: 37 GP, 16 scoreless = 43%
2011-12: 78 GP, 33 scoreless = 42%
2010-11: 80 GP, 33 scoreless = 41%
2009-10: 71 GP, 33 scoreless = 46%
2008-09: 73 GP, 31 scoreless = 42%
2007-08: 82 GP, 40 scoreless = 49%
2006-07: 82 GP, 29 scoreless = 35%
2005-06: 81 GP, 44 scoreless = 54%

On average, Vanek goes scoreless in 44% of games played in a season. Like I said yesterday, you need your best player to be getting points in 70% (+/- 5%) of games played. Vanek did that in 06-07 and he wasnt even our best player. I guess the argument that hes "not consistent" isnt a good argument, because hes obviously consistent. He has hot streaks to the start the season, cools off tremendously down the stretch and you can count on him going scoreless in 44% of games played.

We could only imagine where this team would be if he was able to be consistent with his 06-07 numbers, scoring in at or around 65% of games played.
- theblueandgold

Facts + Hockeybuzz = Apocalypse.

Don't disagree, Browns a good player. The problem is, what will your take be when it's an opposing player knocking Brown out for any number of games on a questionable play? Especially when it's a player that continuessly goes unpunished for these types of plays? I think you'd be singing a different tune had someone like Clutterbuck taken out Kopitar on a reckless play in that game. All I'm saying is, it's easy to stand by your player when he's the one getting away scott free from a play that should have at the very least been penalized on the ice.

LA fans were screaming for blood last season when Brodziak took Kopitar into the boards and ended up getting a major and a match penalty on a play that was no where near as agregious. Kopitar sold the penalty by laying on the ice for a few minutes and never even left the game.
- MnGump

That's fair, but I'm not really the homer you may think. Case in point: Stoll's twice boarding Fowler this year with only a 1 game suspension on the second hit. I would have suspended him on both, and for longer. And I haaaaaate the Ducks.

You cut me deep, joch.
- nfph

I'm a cutter...

That's fair, but I'm not really the homer you may think. Case in point: Stoll's twice boarding Fowler this year with only a 1 game suspension on the second hit. I would have suspended him on both, and for longer. And I haaaaaate the Ducks.
- cryptical77

To quote a great Saturday Night Love skit: "it was to my understanding that there would not be any math".... may have embellished it a bit... Chevy Chase doing President Harold Ford. LMAO
- Stadtusquo

That's fair, but I'm not really the homer you may think. Case in point: Stoll's twice boarding Fowler this year with only a 1 game suspension on the second hit. I would have suspended him on both, and for longer. And I haaaaaate the Ducks.
- cryptical77

Fair enough. BTW, I don't think you're a homer necessarily. I just think it's easy to look at a play from one angle when it favors your team. But I see what you're saying.

Ryno, why are you linking me with an article to support your argument that was written in Nov 2011 before the 11-12 season even ended, using projections based on Vanek's hot streak at the beginning of the year? We all know how last season turned out.

Here, lets "fact check" my statement:

2012-13: 37 GP, 16 scoreless = 43%
2011-12: 78 GP, 33 scoreless = 42%
2010-11: 80 GP, 33 scoreless = 41%
2009-10: 71 GP, 33 scoreless = 46%
2008-09: 73 GP, 31 scoreless = 42%
2007-08: 82 GP, 40 scoreless = 49%
2006-07: 82 GP, 29 scoreless = 35%
2005-06: 81 GP, 44 scoreless = 54%

On average, Vanek goes scoreless in 44% of games played in a season. Like I said yesterday, you need your best player to be getting points in 70% (+/- 5%) of games played. Vanek did that in 06-07 and he wasnt even our best player. I guess the argument that hes "not consistent" isnt a good argument, because hes obviously consistent. He has hot streaks to the start the season, cools off tremendously down the stretch and you can count on him going scoreless in 44% of games played.

We could only imagine where this team would be if he was able to be consistent with his 06-07 numbers, scoring in at or around 65% of games played.
- theblueandgold

Which wis by biggest issue with the notion that Vanek is a super star. Is he really really good? Of course, but a guy like Vanek can't be your best player or passed off as a super star because of the amount of games that he is just flat out not playing well

Didn't know being against cheap shots "elbows to the face" that are deliberate means i like wussy hockey. I played ice hockey for several years and loved the physical part of the sport. I also loved hockey in the 90's for the most part because of the pyhsical play.

This isn't a physical play. Its a deliberate elbow to the face of a player. Case Closed.
- Smittyx36

Case closed? Deliberate? No I agree with the guy who said hockey is becoming a wussy sport. Pominville go for a "check" and leads with his head and face. Brown throws a check back but because that idot led with his face thats where he got hit. Not dirty or cheap just a stupid play by the sub par pysical force of Pominivlle.;

been hearing about this hit all morning on WGR. read the kings fans posts here. still had not seen it. so i went to see the play in anticipation of coming back here to blast the homer LA fans.

WOW. talk about an over reaction. im not surprised there was no penalty called and i think there will be no suspension. it was a hockey play. do elbows sometimes hit faces in hockey? yup.

im totally against thug/stupid plays but a player needs to be responsible for himself as well...
- battelmt