Comments on: Thanks to Dan Carcillo, My Kind of Saturday Night Massacre

By: Brian

Brian — Mon, 07 Dec 2009 17:45:29 +0000

If the goal of Sir Johnny Thug-A-Lot is to take out a top line guy through nefarious methods, I don’t really see how having a goon on our side is really going to stop them. The thugs big enough won’t care about getting in a dust-up with our guy and the ones dumb enough (I’m looking at you Carcillo) won’t either. I think the last two games have shown that the league, and maybe more surprisingly, the refs aren’t afraid to put their collective foot down. That being said, I do think we need some grit on our D, but more to wear down our opponents rather than as some sort of cold war escalation policy.

By: Katie

Katie — Mon, 07 Dec 2009 15:00:40 +0000

The provincialism of the Philadelphia sports media surprises me again. Not. There was no high stick. There was not, as suggested in another paper, an exchange of cross-checks.

Keith Jones going into full apologist mode was shameful.

Your tweet hit the bullseye on the enforcer issue. That power play may be nice, but it doesn’t matter for jack if your first line winger is sent to the hospital.

By: CapsFan1975

CapsFan1975 — Mon, 07 Dec 2009 02:32:20 +0000

@Sam

Some people think that “Il Duco” will not be long for the NHL anyhow.

If anyone told me before yesterday’s game that a Flyer would get even more penalty minutes against the Caps than “Il Duco” did, I would not have believed it. Even though we’re talking about Philthy.

By: Sam

Sam — Mon, 07 Dec 2009 00:16:33 +0000

While I’m glad that the Caps got the 9-minute PP, does anyone else think it is strange that Carcillo got a 4 game suspension and Duco didn’t get anything? I think Duco’s attack on Giroux was far dirtier than the fight. Duco actually tackled Giroux and kept punching him on the ice. At least Carcillo walked away after his punch on Bradley (who, while he may not have been able to defend himself, did see it coming).

The problem with the NHL is that they will give punishments more frequently if someone bleeds regardless of what actually took place. In my opinion, Ovechkin’s check against Buffalo’s Kaleta should have been okay but Kaleta fell and got scratched up in the process and Ovie got a GM for it. Bradley got cut open in his fight. Had Giroux received a bloody nose from Duco, we probably would see Duco sitting for a few games. However, that wouldn’t make the attack any dirtier.

Duco should be suspended for what he did, regardless of how easily Giroux walked away from it. The NHL needs to start punishing people for their intent, not just the outcome.

By: Fonz

Fonz — Sun, 06 Dec 2009 23:08:49 +0000

We hear about “The Code” all the time. The intent of such a code (in large part) is to keep players safe by promoting a fair fight. If fighting is the way that you want to settle a score or attempt a momentum swing, the code is there to keep the guys safe who’s job it is to do the dirty work in the context of the game. No one REALLY wants to seriously hurt an opponent(with few exceptions).

No mater Bradley’s intent (and it does look like he’s trying to drop the glove to swing when he gets hit), he hadn’t had the opportunity to decide to fight and square up. That’s not a fight. That’s assault, and the on-ice officials got the call right.

By: Jim

Jim — Sun, 06 Dec 2009 21:26:43 +0000

While I’m not arguing that Carcillo is a goon, first and foremost, Bradley does drop the gloves every few games, and Carcillo was clearly trying to get a fight going with the Caps only player passing for an enforcer, which Bradley was happy to oblige, it seemed. The problem wasn’t necessarily that he threw a punch too early, but that the one he threw happened to be the knockout blow. I’ve seen lots of fights that start in similar ways, with one guy throwing before the other guy is totally ready, but they rarely end after one punch.

As a side note, can we somehow get word to Matt Bradley that maybe fighting just isn’t his thing? That’s 3 times in very recent memory I’ve seen him get annihilated and come away bloody (the last being against the Rangers, if I recall correctly, prior to scoring on that beautiful breakaway).

By: Victor

Victor — Sun, 06 Dec 2009 19:50:09 +0000

Per tsn.ca, he got a four-game suspension: http://tsn.ca/nhl/story/?id=301359

By: Jeremy

Jeremy — Sun, 06 Dec 2009 16:28:11 +0000

I agree Pucksandbooks. The Comcast Philly website (my first venture there) has the Flyers’ postgame interviews, and they are in line with your comments. Re: the leadership tension, Richards had an odd moment where he says, very quietly, something like “I am prepared to lead the team.” It was not exactly convincing. Of course the real leadership comes when the cameras aren’t around, and it sounds like he had a conversation with Carcillo.

By: pucksandbooks

pucksandbooks — Sun, 06 Dec 2009 15:50:24 +0000

All great, great points, Jeremy. I actually listened to Philly sports radio WIP after the game last night (my new favorite radio station), and there was considerable attention paid by both the studio host and the at-game correspondent to the reaction to Carcillo in the Flyers’ room. Pronger didn’t mince words. Mike Richards actually retrieved Carcillo, who was hiding, and apparently told him ‘You made this mess, you’re gonna face the music’. (I’m paraphrasing.) There does seem to be a leadership tension on that team, but Richards did the right thing in the postgame last night, from my vantage.

By: Jeremy

Jeremy — Sun, 06 Dec 2009 15:43:59 +0000

To their (extremely limted) credit the Flyers were not blaming the refs after the game. Their announcers and some fans seem to think that because Bradley had just formed the “intent” to fight (that is, he had just started dropping his gloves), he should get 5 mins. Of course, as OFB points out, the fist was already in his face before he had even had a chance to let go of his stick. So while Bradley might have been deserving of the major had things lasted a little longer – had he had the opportunity to engage at all – the call was right. Bradley had indeed not started “fighting” (whatever his intent).

The other thing is when you are the unprovoked aggressor in this situation, you are rolling the dice with the refs. The Flyers seemed to recognize that (and they repeatedly called out Carcillo after the game).

Finally, the refs didn’t give the Caps any goals. The Caps didn’t let up, taking advantage of the power play, and the Flyers’ listless goaltending.

The other play of the game was Fehr stepping up on that Flyer before that first goal. No idea how the puck stayed in the zone, but the Flyers wanted to come out strong, and that goal was huge.