GUEST POST: Ryan Lambert of Puck Daddy

 

The always entertaining (and inflammatory) Ryan Lambert of Puck Daddy is back, folks.  My apologies on the delay – he sent me this over a day ago.  Hope you enjoy!

Follow him on twitter.

*****

Shut Up, Ray Shero

-by Ryan Lambert

  

An actual thing an NHL general manager said about one of his own players:
 
“The suspension is warranted because that’s exactly the kind of hit we’re trying to get out of the game.”

 And with that, Ray Shero was showered with smiles and plaudits and flowers from all angles. What courage it took for Shero to come out and say that! About his own player! This really shows the Penguins care about the headshot issue!
 
What this all ignored, of course, was that Matt Cooke was his own player to begin with.
 
Boy, that’s troublesome, huh? The team that’s been so far out in front of all this reprehensible and irredeemable dirty play in the league this year just happens to have its most dangerous player on payroll for a sizeable chunk of money, and has been since 2008.
 
Since the start of that 2008-09 season, Cooke has received four suspensions from the league totaling as many as 25 games, and probably should have gotten more for the type of vicious knee-to-knee and flying elbow shots that have become his grisly trademark.
 
So to say that Shero is not being duplicitous when he praises the league for suspending Cooke is more than a little bit incorrect. We heard that Shero sat down and talked with Cooke over the summer, spelling out that the kind of play that resulted in, say, Marc Savard’s brain injury, is simply not acceptable.
 
And we heard that through backchannels. Never once did Shero come out and say that elbows like those on Savard or Artem Anisimov were unacceptable and didn’t belong in hockey in, I don’t know, some sort of press release.

Let’s not pretend, however, that they didn’t sign Cooke to a three-year, $5.4 million extension knowing full well what they were getting. In that famous little “Matt Cooke cheapshotting history” video CBC put together last postseason, 10 of the 17 or 20 hits they highlighted came when he was wearing a Penguins jersey. Now, those were of varying brutality and he was suspended for two of them, but that’s at least an average of five borderline or outright dirty players per year that resulted in someone being hurt for at least a short while.
 
The team also stood by when at least seven more questionable plays (according to this) happened this year, offering either silent affirmation that this type of play is acceptable — by not benching him — or, in the case of that horrifying hit from behind on Fedor Tyutin, for which Cooke was suspended four games, outright supporting him and blaming the victim (right, Danny Bylsma?).
 
But now after this latest elbow, Shero chose to break his silence, when the tide of public and league sentiment safely turned against his guy, aided (only as a matter of coincidence, I’m sure) by team owner Mario Lemieux bitching out league officials over that Islanders game. And, if you watch the DiPietro/Cooke video in the above link, you’ll see that Cooke fueled some of that bad blood in no small way earlier in the year.
 
And now he puts out that statement, leans back smugly in his chair, and looks like some sort of hero to any idiot who opts to take everything at face value.
 
But really, he’s nothing more than the father who accepts no responsibility for his poorly-behaved child, getting scolded at a parent-teacher conference.
 
Matt Cooke is as much the toddler who bites kids in the sandbox as anything else. In fact, he won’t stop biting kids. Stealing their toys. Pulling their hair. And Shero sits there condoning it by letting the kid get time in the sandbox day after day, just waiting for the next kid to start wailing while Cooke stands there sheepishly with that detestable “What did I do?” face of his.

 But now Shero’s been called into school, after Mario led the anti-bullying campaign, and he sits there saying, “I know it’s not acceptable and I’ve told him that but he just doesn’t listen!”
 
Now Matt’s got a couple weeks worth of detention to sit there and think about what he’s done, and daddy dearest totally agrees with it. But the kid’s not going to learn because in the end, Shero already promised to take him out for $3.6 million worth of ice cream over the next two years.

We’ve also heard the talk from Cooke, who’s saying all the right things about knowing he has to change how he plays, but we’ve also heard it before, so the only way we’ll know he’s changed is in practical application.
 
I guess the lesson we should take from this is that we have to judge people by their actions and not their words. Cooke can say he’s sorry but the next time he tries to take someone’s head off (and believe me, there will be a next time), what will that have meant? Shero and Lemieux can say they don’t condone his actions, but they’re still going to pay him a lot of money.
 
And don’t get me wrong. Cooke is a very effective hockey player when he’s playing hockey. He’s worth the $1.8 million a year in that regard. But to get that type of strong defensive play, you also have to put up with the cheapshot, injurious nonsense.
 
The Penguins had two years to figure it out. That Cooke has continued to play that way — and admittedly, he’s gotten appreciably worse this season — isn’t a light-dawns-on-Marblehead revelation to anyone in the league except, apparently, Ray Shero.
 
So Shero’s either one of two things: an idiot to have not recognized it before, or someone who is willing to tolerate the depths to which the league’s most dangerous dirty player will sink because goddamn is he ever good at killing penalties.
 
Neither one of those things is praiseworthy. And no self-congratulatory press release is going to change that.

*****

 

Matt Cooke – A history of cheapshots:

Matt Cooke on Tyutin, Two Beauty Goals, Subban and Gill

 

New Hockey Primetime: On Phil Kessel and being the whipping boy.  Haven’t even submitted it yet, was antsy to blog today.  Should be up by noon MST. (link to Hockey Primetime.com)

*****

As I’m sure you’ve heard or seen by now, yesterday Matt Cooke ran Fedor Tyutin from behind – and I mean, numbers showing, no turning, from behind from behind - and will likely recieve a suspension for that today.  He damn well better.

Adam Proteau of The Hockey News and I got into it a little bit on twitter after he made comments that it’s the NHL to blame, not Cooke for his actions (although he did end up going with “both,”).  He started his case with this argument:

Pit bull owners say the dogs are docile but can have anger bred into them. Matt Cooke is hockey’s pit bull: reared & rewarded by his owners.

We took our disagreement to both private messages and public, largely discussing this issue itself in private ones, with my argument being that every player in the league plays under the same rules, so when one idiot continues to be a repeat offender, we can’t deflect the blame from him to the league the way we would rightfully deflect the blame from angry pitbulls to pitbull owners (we can assume by “owners,” he means those that raise them to fight).  It’s just not the same thing – we’re humans, and are responsible for our own decision-making a touch more than dogs.  We can’t let that (on-ice) animal off the hook for his actions, which is what I felt Proteau was doing.

In the end, Adam and I really did come to agree on the issue, we just needed to work our way to that common ground.  Bottom line is, the NHL needs to be tougher on him, and he needs to quit putting players’ bodies and lives in danger with his reckless play.  If he doesn’t, and the NHL doesn’t suspend him appropriately for this, Adam and I will agree: both parties will be implicit.

Part of me wonders if the Cooke incidents are happening more (if they aren’t, it sure feels like they are.  But maybe that’s social media) because his game is in decline – not so much statistically this year, he’s just less effective as an Alex Burrows-esque agitator. 

In that role (if you’re enough of a clod to choose to play with such disrespect), you’re “supposed” to get away with cheap shots behind the play, outskate your opponent up the ice and make him catch you for a retalitory penalty in front of the ref.  I feel like he’s losing it a bit, and has to do the blatant stuff to remind us what his “role” is.  Otherwise teams would say take your 30 points and go home.

Whatever it is, it’s awful to watch, and scary to think about what could happen if the NHL doesn’t put him back in his cage for awhile.

*****

Such a hard shot, from that angle, that high, against Fleury, off the post…. Just, wow:

And I mean…. can you sell that slapper any harder, any better before leaving your teammate with an empty-net tap-in?  McDonald to Backes, wow:

*****

Really good story here by Arpon Basu, writing about some media members misinterpreting comments from Gill to Subban, and writing a post about Subban being bad in the room. (Bob McKenzie tweeted the story this a.m., PD may have linked it yesterday.)

I never understood reporters in the dressing room drawing their own conclusions on stuff like this (and clearly Basu doesn’t either).

I can tell you first hand, the relationship between older veterans and rookies is hilarious, because oftentimes, the old vets intentionally ride the younger guys to the point of absolute hilarity.  It’s always tongue-in-cheek, it’s always very paternal, and once in awhile old man winter will smile just so everybody remembers it’s all a joke.

There are, undeniably, generational differences that lead those older players to dislike, or not get, some of the young guys.  But as the article mentions, you almost always find a way to at least co-exist.

As for Subban throwing his jersey on the floor?  Learning not to do that isn’t “becoming a pro.”  You know not to do that in junior hockey.  Bad form, PK.

In the end, I like Subban and all his flair.  Always exciting to see what he’s gonna do next.

Weekend Catch-Up: All Hockey, No Golf

This is going to blow your mind, and probably make you happy, but….. I’m gonna leave the Masters blogging alone for today (though I’m not quiiiite done with it).  I’ma do what I do best.  Nooo, not make fun of the WNBA.  I’m gonna write about hockey.

Sweet, glorious hockey.

It’s that time of year, people.

So let’s cover the exciting events of the weekend, starting with…..

THE ROCKET RICHARD TROPHY

 GOALS

Crosby 51
Stamkos 51
Ovechkin 50

Though it’s sort of become what I do for a living, I hate “serious” sports arguments.

You know, some guy makes a point that’s supported by some random factoid he read somewhere, puts it in defense mode, and the conversation never advances.  This happens everytime you talk Richard Trophy.  Ice time!  Powerplays!  Games played!  Linemates!

Whatever.  They all had remarkable years.  Plus, this trophy shouldn’t leave much to talk about.  It’s black and white; based on totals. If we’re arguing about who the best goal scorer in the game is – that’s Ovechkin by a mile. 

But still, I feel inclined to make two points:

1)  Why isn’t there a tie breaker so someone can actually win it outright?  Give the trophy to the guy who had the least games played (Sid has one less), or to the guy who had less empty netters? (as has been mentioned a number of times, Puck Daddy included).  Orrr, am I just suggesting that because both stats favour Sid (only had one, to Stamkos’ three) and I was rooting for him “2 – 4 – 6 – 8″ style. (Who do we a-ppre-ci-ate!)

2)  While on the empty-net / pro-Sid talk….. Let’s all admit it.  Stamkos getting his 51st on a set play from a d-zone faceoff was a little cheesy.  I seriously do like Stamkos (just wanted Sid to get at least one Rocket in his career), but come on.  Up 2-1, your centerman wouldn’t push the puck forward in a normal game, for fear of giving it to your opponents d-man, who’d bomb it back down your goalies throat.  So to call a play you wouldn’t normally call, strictly to get your linemate a goal – while I would have done THE EXACT SAME THING - is still corny.  We’re allowed to acknowledge that, while acknowledging the fact that Stamkos’ season was mind-blowing. 

Congrats to all.  Except Ovy, who’s a complete and total third-place failure.

*****

I’d be remiss if I didn’t quickly mention the Evander Holyfield Kane punch on Matt Cooke (video), because nothing says “justice” like getting knocked the eff out by an 18 year old.  In the cartoon version of that fight, Cooke would’ve held up a “HELP’ sign just before the punch, and absolutely would’ve had little stars and birdies floating around his mini-ice-nap.

 *****

So, I sat down at my favourite pub after work on Friday, and Breezy joined me.  To my left, some chaps were chatting about hockey, so of course, I chimed it.  Turns out the gentleman beside me scored the first goal in Canucks history, and had a 15 year NHL career – Mr. Barry Wilkins.  Here’s our conversation:

Barry:  Sure I know you’re Dad!  He was on the Islanders team that beat us (Pittsburgh) when we were up 3-0 on them in the playoffs!

Me:  Ah!  Oh.  Sorry bout that.

Barry: Not a week goes by without it bothering me.

Me:  Mmm.  Um… probably doesn’t help that my father-in-law was on that team too, huh?  Clark Gillies.

Barry:  He broke my shoulder/collar bone with a big hit.

Me:  This isn’t going well.  ….I’ll text my Dad and see if he remembers playing you.

Barry:  He’ll probably remember me as a d-man with rock hands.

Dads Text: “BARRY WILKINS? LEFT-HANDED D-MAN, STONE HANDS?”

Me: Sorry, he’s not writing back for whatever reason….

  *****

The Flyers/Rangers play-in game was exciting, but Rangers fans… if Henrik Lundqvist makes 43 saves, you’re shooting on Bobby Boucher, and you can’t win… you don’t deserve to.  NY should ship Torterella and Sather out, grab an experienced GM and the best AHL coach, and just start over. 

Although, I must admit: as an Islanders fan, I think you guys should keep the same personnel and keep plugging.  You’re good enough.  You can do it Rangers, I promise.  No changes.  Just grab that shovel and start digging towards next season….

*****

Of all the eight teams to make playoffs in the West, only one team isn’t a plus in the “goal differential” category (which matters) – that being Nashville.  Their failure to get it done down the stretch buried their playoff hopes - now they play Chicago, who’s goal differential looks like my two round score if they let me try to make the cut at the Masters: +62.  Here comes a beat down from Chi town.

*****

Though you may not have been following my fantasy hockey league (okay, you haven’t been.  Like, at all), I made a late season charge to grab the last playoff seed (8th in a 20 team head-to-head league).  Then I won round one.  Then I won the semi’s.  And last week was the finals, where I……

Got SMOKED.  Badly.  Congrats to Pat of “The Kindrachuckers”, to whom I know owe a bottle of Crown Royal.  Curses.  Thanks for playin’ everyone, that was a blast.  I’ll be doing it again next year (a pay league, so I can buy the winner something cool…. or just give him/her the cash), and mayyyy end up doing something for playoffs if I have time to set it up.

*****

 Henrik Sedin won the Art Ross this year, with 112 points.  I have nothing to say except congrats.  That, and I’d like to subtly imply he’s a cyborg by asking people if anybody has ever actually witnessed him bleed blood.  Just a question, that’s all.

*****

Congratulations are also due to Boston College, who beat Wisconsin 5-0 to win the NCAA National Championship.  After watching Wisconsin play RIT, I was pretty sure they could handle the Maple Leafs with relative ease, so I was a surprised they got thumpled so bad.  But then I realized “is being better than the Maple Leafs that great of a measuring stick, at any level?”

 

*****

Okay, THAT’S ENOUGH.  Especially since playoff predictions are baking in the oven.  The deliciousness shall be ready soon!

 

Seabrook/Wisniewski, Campbell/Bourne, Cooke/Bruins

 

Yesterday, Mike Wazowski James Wisniewski got suspended for eight games.  I guess we all really worked Colin Campbell to a climax on that one, huh? 

Whatever – if you saw the Wisniewski interview, he looked like he felt really, really bad…. that he got suspended.  I’m not saying the guy’ll play like an angel the rest of his career, but forfeiting the price of a nice house in Phoenix might give him pause for a few seconds, I would think.

I messed up by not running the hit yesterday, and by only commenting on it in the comment section.  Here’s me making up for it, if you haven’t already seen it…. which you have, so umm… move on.

While we’re discussing Colin Campbell, as we often to seem to be….

My Dad and ol’ Coley couldn’t exactly be described by the phrase “BFF’s” back when they played.  ….Oh look, two clips – and by the way, they’re awesome – the commentators crack me up.

Colin Campbell vs Bob Bourne

Ahh, that felt good and it wasn’t even me.  I love the casual nature of the color guy in this one, doing the math on PIMS.  Just another whistle between plays…

Apparently they also score fight wins by take-downs, as Campbell was the “clear winner” against Sutter.  PS, that first left from my Dad was a bomb, thank god it didn’t land, for everyone’s sake.

*****

Okay, on to Matt Cooke vs. the Boston Bruins:

What did people think was going to happen? 

The circus demonstrated how badly some people are out of touch with the realities of professional hockey.  This was the type of thing that emphasizes to the guys in the room how much certain fans and media outside that room don’t get their job.

Every night some guy has a target on his chest, which is of secondary importance to the win.  Every night. It’s a long season, and you play the same teams plenty of times over the year, hell, over a career.  And, it’s not a cliche - their jobs ACTUALLY depend on winning.  And people flew in to catch this game expecting to see fireworks while the biggest fight is their battle for eighth? 

Granted, this one happened to be an extreme case (due to it’s blatant nature, followed by no suspension), and the guys are well aware of that.  But the night unfolded the way it did to appease those that went out of their way to be a part of the “event”.  Cooke had to fight if he didn’t want to be crucified in the (for once) vendetta-aware media, and the Bruins were no different.  In no way am I saying they wouldn’t have fought if not for the media, I’m just saying it wouldn’t have gone down like a bout at Caesars Palace 1:58 in.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

The fact is, these are professional athletes, and though they often act spontaneously, you don’t get to that level without some measure of discipline.  Many-a-nights you leave (frustrated) after taking a number and just playing the game.  Just because the media sniffed out the obvious “hey, their gonna be mad at that guy, right?”, this all seemed a little…. forced.  It doesn’t usually happen the quarter-second after a guy’s skates hit the ice, but eventually, guys get found.

And it’s not always a fight – a late hit, an extra shot, whatever you can get in there and not hurt your teams chances.  As soon as a guy puts his vendetta ahead of the team goal, he sits.  He may get healthy scratched the next day (and the coach will tell the media its because a guy wasn’t “effective” to avoid the circus.  Read: Avery), and if it happens enough, he may get dealt.

For those who thought they’d fight Cooke everytime he stepped on the ice, chase him around and make highlight-worthy plays on him…. with Colin Campbell and every east coast media guy there?  To quote NFL Countdown, C’mon, man.  In the end, they may not be done with him, but they aren’t idiots.  They put on the show people came to see, right away.  But they’ll find him again when it’s not mid-playoff push.  They’re disciplined.  They’re pros.

Don Cherry, Get Fuzzy and Video Review

 

Before I let the Matt-Cooke-on-Mark-Savard-hit go (and keeping in mind that once I do, Savard will still be dealing with weeks/months of photo-sensitivity and inability to exercise without dry-heaving for few minutes), I thought I’d run the Coaches Corner where Don Cherry addressed the situation better than anyone so far – it’s a must-see.  This is the rare issue worthy of Cherry’s intensity, and really puts Matt Cooke (and the situation) in perspective:

Okay, sorry to start off on that note – let’s get happy! (© Pardon The Interruption)

*****

I’m a cartoon guy. 

Not like a “Saturday morning” cartoon guy, or a “Superman” cartoon guy, but a comic strip dude.  I can get pretty passionate in either praise for The Far Side, or in VILE PULSATING HATRED for Family Circus (I’ve been thinking about running their daily cartoon and just viciously shredding it like Fuck You, Penguin does to cute animals pictures, only my version would lack the redeeming quality of having cute animal pictures). If you’re a comic-sseur like myself, you may enjoy the following daily comic strips (your suggestions welcome):

Get Fuzzy

Dibert

 

 

 

 

 

Pearls Before Swine

(Also, in college I quite liked the Strong Bad emails and Teen Girl Squad at Homestar Runner.com.)

*****

Okay, back to hockey – one quick thought:

A colour guy made a great point on the weekend:  Ilya Kovalchuk took a lazy wrister from just inside the blue line, and Marc-Andre Fleury went to catch it.  Travis Zajac came from the side of the net, and simply pushed in Fleury’s glove with his stick, allowing the puck to go, y’know, in the net.  From the refs angle, he couldn’t see the interference.

Why not make goalie interference video reviewable?  I understand the “it’d hold up the game” argument, but isn’t that one of the few places you’d like to be sure you got the call exactly right?

*****

Oh wooden legs.  Are you ever un-funny?

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

*****

And last, let me continue to siphen away those painful Monday minutes for ya.  This is “Really?!?, with Seth and Jerry” —- aimed at Eric Massa.

 

Inside The Dressing Room: Kangaroo Court & Apologies

 

I’ve written before about players putting money towards the team pot for big wins.  In that bit, I danced around the best aspect of raising that year-end fund (which, of course, goes to a pizza and pop party that definitely wouldn’t involve, say, a strip club). 

Kangaroo Court.

A lot of people are familar with the concept, as a lot of organizations use them as a fun revenue generator.

At the professional level, it’s fun, and a decent amount of money changes hands (another reason why it’s a bitch getting traded or cut – guys party on the pot you chipped in to).  At the college level, it’s the highlight of the freaking week, and max fines are only $3 (save for broken team rules, like $15 for being late, etc.).

How it works is simple – the dry erase board is hung somewhere visible in the room.  The format is basic: when you want to fine a teammate, you write his number under “fined” and your own under “by”.

16  -  12

No need to disclose topics, or any of the who/what/why/when/where/how circumstances of the fine-able offense until court comes around.

Needless to say, on Mondays, a lot of numbers go up on the board from the weekend.  Half the fun is harrassing the guy you’re fining, or vice versa.  If you’re on the “fined” side, it’s not the money you’re stressed about, it’s the public condemnation/humiliation/verbal-beat-down (Strictly totally clever, Shakespearian witticisms.  Yep.  Hardly any gay sex jokes.). 

What did I ever do to you?  Fine then, I’m fining you for _________ (insert petty thing that’d never stick).

The rule is, you can’t fine someone for something that happened previous to the last Kangaroo Court session, which means you have to get away with whatever it is you did for a full week.

When court rolls around post-practice, the fun begins.  In college, the seniors are the jury, in pro, the captains.  Whoever is running court grabs the board, and it begins. 

First up, 16 is being fined by number 12.  State your case.

You have to save your best stories for court, preferably bar stories, as you have the whole teams attention.  There’s always some gem about a guy throwing a line at someone’s girlfriend, buying drinks for a woman of questionable repute or any other form of debauchery that’s deemed to have crossed the line.  (God I want to tell the photo evidence story.  We’ll all have to go for drinks some time so I can.  All of us.)

The person being crucified, upon just finding out what he did wrong (okay, sometimes you know), has to defend himself to the team and the jury.  Then, the ruling comes in, from no fine to three bucks (it’s not about the money, you may have guessed).  In pro, the numbers are higher, but it’s still beside the point.

College is an experience I wouldn’t trade for anything, and I can’t remember ever laughing harder at any point during my four years than I did during those trials.  Mostly cause I never did anything fine-worthy, and was always on the fun side of it.  Which, I can assure you, because it’s my blog, and I have the power to delete comments.  MUAH-HA-HAAAA.

*****

You know what’s crazy that a lot of fans never get to see?  Guys that apologize to the whole team between periods.

Nathan Lawson, the amazing/underrated goaltender of the Bridgeport Sound Tigers was always the first person to own up to a bad goal – Sorry about that one guys, I gotta have that.  I’ll be better in the third, pick me up – which is just so refreshing.  Plenty of goalies tend to believe (or at least act) like they’ve never given up a bad goal, so when you get a good guy like that, you really want to work for him, you know?

It happens after bad penalties too, at the end of a period – My bad guys, that was stupid – kill this thing off for me and lets get back on ‘em.

Of course, then there’s the guys who apologize, then go out and do the same thing over and over, which sort of takes the value out of their words.  You know who doesn’t strike me as an apologizer?  Matt Cooke.  Just a thought.

Anyways, that’s all the totally random dressing room stuff I’ve got for today.  Thanks for the support – the site is really blowing up the last couple weeks.  You just wait to see how much traffic we get on here for the first round of playoffs when the Islanders play the Caps!  Yeah!  Islande….no?  Okay, probably not.