Follow-up on the Pronger Unsportsmanlike

While I fully expected the NHL to give some weasel-y explanation about why the call was "correct," I am a little surprised by how the hockey community in general has approved of the call.

Basically the rationalizations amount to "Pronger should know better", the call just "feels right" and captures "the spirit of the rule."

In my opinion, that is an atrocious argument.

Unsportsmanlike conduct isn't some all encompassing penalty where the referee can call infractions that "feel" right at the time. There are general precedents of types of behavior that warrant an unsportsmanlike penalty, and even for such behaviors, it has to be egregious or flagrant to be justify a penalty.

No type of goalie-screening has ever been a penalty until Avery's fairly wild display, and even then it didn't draw a penalty. After the game, the NHL made an impromptu rule change to stop Avery's antics.

Chris Pronger's actions don't come under that amendment. The NHL could've easily made a rule after the Avery incident that said "a player may not raise his arms for the purpose of blocking the goalie's eyes." They didn't. Clearly they chose to have narrow rule for a very specific situation. It's quite a stretch to call Pronger's momentary arm raise with his back to the goalie as equivalent.

Frankly, this type of intuitive judgment with little regard to the written rule is why NHL suspensions are such a mess and universally panned. Nobody knows what the hell is going on, and the NHL should be embarrassed to so directly change a result of a game with a novel interpretation of a rule.

Oh that Pronger

It didn't take long for Pronger do be in the middle of controversy again.

In OT with the Flyers on the PP, Pronger is playing the front of the net to screen the goalie. The Flyers score, and the goal is shockingly waived off.

Flyers broadcast version LINK

The first sign of a bad call is that announcers on both broadcasts were totally miffed at first, thinking high stick or goalie interference, only to have both theories easily discarded by replay.

Turns out the call was unsportsmanlike conduct under the "Sean Avery rule". This rule was created a few years ago to directly address a unique play;

Soon thereafter, the NHL created this rule;

An unsportsmanlike conduct minor penalty (Rule 75) will be interpreted and applied, effective immediately, to a situation when an offensive player positions himself facing the opposition goaltender and engages in actions such as waving his arms or stick in front of the goaltender's face, for the purpose of improperly interfering with and/or distracting the goaltender as opposed to positioning himself to try to make a play.

I am not aware of this penalty ever actually being called until now.

After extra viewings, I do believe Pronger's intent was to raise his arms to block Kiprusoff's view. Some Flyers have said they thought he was motioning to direct the play, but I disagree. Pronger himself conceded nothing;

Either way, Pronger's intent is irrelevant. Clearly, he didn't violate the rule as written. He doesn't turn to face the goalie, but is facing the play the entire time and only briefly glances back. Pronger's actions come nowhere close to Avery's blatant and prolonged arm waving, for which the rule was written. Pronger's longest look back actually comes after Kiprusoff slashes him, who clearly wasn't happy with the Pronger's obstruction. Of course the same slash causes Kiprusoff to lose focus and let in an easy shot seconds thereafter.

The officials completely botched this call for two reasons. First, as stated above, Pronger didn't violate the rule. Period. There is no grey area. Second, if the officials thought what Pronger was doing was a violation of the Avery rule, it should have been an immediate penalty. The referee should've raised his arm and blown the play dead long before the shot came in.

Rarely do you see a call so obviously incorrect so directly affect the result of a game. Now the Flyers didn't complain too much after the game (other than Pronger's belligerence), but I think that was more driven by not wanting to whine after an admittedly mediocre performance regardless of the goal call.

Either the NHL owes the Flyers an apology, or the NHL needs to clarify the rule and explain how the written rule isn't accurate. That being said, what is most likely to occur is the NHL will pretend nothing happened, and no attacker will raise his arms to block the goalie's eyes again for fear of another baffling call.

Stop and Smell the Roses - 11/23

-For the second game in a row, the Flyers had a truly awful first period. Not a recipe for success, but pretty impressive that they got 4 points out of such games, which came against 2 of the best teams in the conference.

-It took the Flyers 68 shots, and a 21 shot period, to finally score on Carey Price this season. I'll say it now--I'm a big believer in this guy, and predict he will be one of the best goalies of his generation. I'm not an avid WJC watcher, but from what I have seen, he is hands-down the best goalie I've seen at that level. No matter how good the chance, he's always one step ahead and everything seems to hit him in the chest. Perhaps things have clicked for him at the NHL level (after some admittedly worrying concerns about work ethic the last 2 years).

-Speaking of clicking, things seems to have clicked for Nodl; he is skating hard, playing with confidence, and *gulp*, scoring goals. Good to see from a player who's excellent defensively and was a high end scorer in college and a 2nd round pick.

-As for JVR, after being benched for a few games, he finally got a goal last night. He's been buzzing around the offensive zone the last few games, hitting a few posts before scoring. I don't think he's found his identity in the NHL yet, but I would suspect he'll carry on that strong play for several more games, at least.

Sometimes young players have to hit a low early in their NHL career and they come back with a vengeance. This happened with Mike Richards, who hit a big dry spell in his second season, missed nearly 2 months with a hernia, and has pretty much been a point/game guy since returning from that injury. Here, I made a graph, because graphs are awesome, showing the rather dramatic turnaround for Richards after hitting his lowpoint, then things 'click' for him.

Is it worth mentioning that Richards and JVR had nearly identical points/game their rookie seasons? 11g 23a is 79gp for Richards, 15g, 20a in 78gp for JVR.

-Boucher is nothing more than a streaky backup goalie at this point, but man his low glove side stinks.

-As expected, nothing came off the Richards-Subban "controversy" last night.

Recapping the Cap (and Leino)

Currently, the Flyers cap for next year projects as follows:

Forwards

Leino (???) -Briere (6.5) -Hartnell (4.2)

Nodl [.8925] -Richards (5.75) -JVR (1.654)

????-Carter (5.27) -Giroux (3.75)

Powe [.761] -Betts (.7) -Shelley (1.1)

Total: 31.27

D

Pronger (4.9) - Carle (3.4)

Timo (6.3) - Coburn (3.2)

Mesz (4)-O'Donnell [1]

Total: 22.8

Goal

Bobo (1.75)

Leighton (1.55)

Total: 3.3

Overall: 57.37

Cap 10-11 - $59.4

There are so many variables in projecting something like this, that you have to make some assumptions to have any kind of meaningful conversation.

For the above, I assumed that Nodl and Powe will accept the Flyers' minimum RFA qualifying offers, and that O'Donnell will resign for the same amount. I also assumed that, one way or another, the following players will not be on the roster next year.

Laperriere

Carcillo

Walker

Zherdev

Boucher

One more assumption; the cap next year will go up by a few million. Let's say it goes up by $3.6 to an even $63 million.

So, given all these assumptions, the Flyers will have approximately $5.5 million in cap space to sign Leino, #12 and #13 forwards, and a #7 defensemen. The Flyers have also indicated in the past that they want to enter the season with at least $1 million in cap space to provide some flexibility during the season. That would reduce the functional signing space to $4.5 million.

Okay one more step. Let's say the Flyers sign cheap-o players for those bottom of the lineup guys at approximately $700k each.

I take a few things away from this breakdown;

1) The Flyers could absorb a signing of Leino without making other changes if he signs for less than $2.4 million

2) If Leino wants more than that, something else will have to go (I say Carle is the likely candidate)

3) Trying to project all this when there are still so many variables floating around is pretty much a futile exercise.

Give Bob a Break

I don't know if Bobrovsky is playing tonight, but the guy needs some games off.

Coming into the season people weren't sure how much he'd play (or even if he'd make the team) because of his unfamiliarity in the North American game. Simply put, he's not used to the shots coming so quickly from everywhere. That's not something that can be fixed in a few starts---it's a process to adjust to that.

As a result, Bob needs to be completely mentally focused because he's out of his element.

Starting 13 straight regular season games is tough for anyone, let alone the new guy dealing with these issues. Starting 3 games in 4 nights is even worse. Unfortunately he's showing the classic signs of mental fatigue, with things like the Plekanec goal sneaking in from a bad spot. Then of course there's the goalie bloodbath of the 8-7 TB game.

C'mon Laviolette, is Boucher in net for a game or two that scary?

Thumbs up on the new headshot rule

Given the Colin Campbell emails that surfaced today, it's probably not the best time to applaud NHL disciplinary action, but a NHL headshot rule has been overdue IMO, and we finally have one this season. It doesn't go as far as I would take it, but it's a start. As with any new rule, you expect growing pains of players, fans and coaches as everyone adjusts and tests the rule's limits, but you never know exactly how that will play out.

The rule is pretty simple;

48.1 Illegal Check to the Head – A lateral or blind side hit to an opponent where the head is targeted and/or the principal point of contact is not permitted.

Two simple elements; 1) is the hit lateral or blind side, and 2) is the head targeted and/or the principal point of contact.

The league also released this video to demonstrate;

Put it all together, and it's clear the intent of the rule is to remove a particular hit from the game, a la boarding and submarine hits. Speaking of boarding, the NHL rulebook states the following regarding boarding;

There is an enormous amount of judgment involved in the application of this rule by the Referees. The onus is on the player applying the check to ensure his opponent is not in a vulnerable position and if so, he must avoid the contact. However, there is also a responsibility on the player with the puck to avoid placing himself in a dangerous and vulnerable position. This balance must be considered by the Referees when applying this rule.

The NHL may as well have applied this paragraph to the new headshot rule because the instructional video makes clear, for blindside hits, the onus is now on the checking player to ensure his opponent is not a vulnerable position.

So easy, right? The following complaints have however have been lodged so far surrounding the rule;

1) Any hit to the head to a player in a vulnerable position is now a penalty

This came up on the following hit;

After the game, Tortorella said "“Do I have a problem with it? Sure, why wouldn’t I? We get these (head shot) tapes sent to us during the summer and at the beginning of the year. Why send them? It’s a waste.”

I don't know how much of that is gamesmanship, and I don't know of any real definition for "blindside", but I can't see any way this hit qualifies as "lateral" or "blindside". It's doesn't come under the new rule, period.

2) It was a shoulder-to-shoulder hit (mostly)

See the Dustin Brown hit;

There are some varying opinions on this hit, and it is a close call. Initial contact appears to be shoulder-to-shoulder, but the follow through appears to be into the head IMO. The rule is not that the hit is directly or initially to the head, but that the head is "targeted" or the "principal point of contact". This hit is very close, and would be a subjective call. I would support calling a hit like this a penalty just about every time---the point of the rule is to put the onus on the checker to stop making these kinds of hits, and if the checker is concerned with making a hockey play, it shouldn't be hard for him to aim away from the head area and still eliminate his man from the play.

3) The checker was not suspended, therefore the NHL decided the hit was legal after all

(see the Brown hit again)

I've seen a lot of people claim that the fact that Brown wasn't suspended shows that the hit wasn't illegal. That is plain, flat out wrong. Nowhere does the rule call for a suspension. The rule simply calls for a major penalty and a game misconduct, which was given. Suspensions are discretionary, and subjectively based on the severity of the play, like boarding. If a player gets called for boarding and is not suspended, does that mean the league is saying it wasn't actually boarding? Of course not. More likely the league decided it was not an egregious violation, and therefore supplementary discipline wasn't necessary.

4) It's not my fault--I'm too tall, or I couldn't avoid it...blah blah blah

See the Joe Thornton hit;

Frankly I'm kind of amazed at how much dispute there has been over this hit. It's a textbook violation of the rule; it is lateral, it is blindside, and it is to the head. The fact that people even feel it's relevant to say that "Thornton is not a dirty player" is merely a sign of how messed up the NHL disciplinary system is. Penalties should be called based on the play, not on some balancing act where the player's rep and his action need to be weighed against one another.

Thornton's brother/agent has also risen to his defense, "I guess being 5'9" was Joe's only solution to avoid this suspension." Under the rule, for lateral and blindside hits, the onus is clearly on the checker to avoid going to the head. Deal wit' it yo.

I think overall the NHL is doing a good job with the new rule, getting most of the calls right. There will be growing pains, and as with any penalty, the refs on the ice will occasionally get it wrong. Still, the rule was worth implementing, and the suspension decisions thus far have been more or less correct.

The Puckburgler

So Pronger was making news again this week with some more puck stealing antics. This poses the question, is Chris Pronger an awful sportsman, or a wise-ass pest?

Obviously this stuff goes back to the Finals, where Chris Pronger was labelled public enemy rather quickly in Chicago. Recall this interview after a spat with Ben Eager on the ice in the finals;

What happened?

"I couldn't hear him, I don't speak gibberish," said Pronger, who picked up a misconduct penalty at the very end and got into it with Eager.

Where's the puck, Pronger was asked.

"It's in the garbage," Pronger replied. "Where it belongs."

You shot a towel at Eager when he complained?

"So what," Pronger replied.

You're collecting pucks now?

"Why not? What's wrong? It's sitting there. What else is gonna happen to it? It's sitting there. Sure, why not. You got a problem with that?"

Are you gonna sell it on eBay?

"I don't know. Apparently, it got him upset. So I guess it worked, didn't it? It's too bad. I guess little things amuse little minds."

Petulant? No doubt. But I don't care what anyone says, the line about throwing it in the garbage is funny.

Some have decided that Pronger is just acting up like a poor loser. The guy has won two Olympic golds, one Stanley Cup, lost two other Cups in the Finals, and played over 1200 NHL games, including almost 150 in the playoffs. I don't buy that he is so overcome with bitterness at a loss that he can't control himself but to act like the spoiled kid on the playground who takes his ball and goes home if he loses.

After Adam Burish, who was a healthy scratch in the Finals said Pronger was "the biggest idiot in the league" who played terribly, and that he'd like to punch Pronger in the face next time;

C'mon that's funny.

Pronger probably relishes his role as infuriating rapscallion a little too much, but he is intentionally playing games with everyone. That's not such a bad thing. Remember, this is a sport where it's generally a well-respected "momentum shifting" tactic to pick a fight and punch a member of the opposing team in the face when they're beating you fair and square.

Best team in the NHL right now?

Another night, another whooping.

The Flyers are 9-0-1 in their last 10, winning their last 3 by a combined 18-4. Definitely the hottest team in the league, and arguably the "best" right now.

On paper, their 1-6 defense lineup is the best in the league, and they have been performing that way thus far. Their 3rd pairing of Meszaros and O'Donnell are each +12 (tied for 2nd in the NHL)!.

Briere is playing his best hockey as a Flyer, Giroux looks poised for a breakout regular season, and Carter and Richards haven't exactly disappeared.

And then there's Bobrovsky. 11-2-1 with a .934 save percentage. Ridiculous.

Not even 25% of the season's done yet, and you can't win anything in November, but a win in November is worth just as much in standings as a win in April. All these early season points will pay off in the long run.

The Flyers are looking like the Stanley Cup favorites the Hockey News foresaw last year, it just took them some time (and a different goalie imported from the KHL) to find that form.

Carter signed -- 11 years, $5.27m/year

The rumors proved to be true, and it is being reported today that Carter has signed an 11-year contract for $5.27m/year.

Let me just take a moment to pat myself on the back for my salary prediction being pretty much spot on.

Also, Carter is not a true number 1 center IMO due to his lack of a any kind of passing or physical game, but he is a quality player no doubt and a $5.27 cap hit won't handicap the team if Carter is going through his up and down scoring streaks.

Carter contract rumors

His next contract with the Flyers is expected to be signed before the month is out.

And according to two sources, it figures to be 10 years, virtually guaranteeing that center turned winger Jeff Carter will spend most, if not his entire career, in orange ‘n black, much like best buddy Mike Richards.

Tim Panaccio - as seen on csnphilly

http://www.csnphilly.com/11/11/10/Carter-Notches-Hat-Trick-as-Flyers-Domin/landing_flyers.html?blockID=350972&feedID=704

Assuming there is any truth to the report, I would expect the Flyers are talking about putting so many years on the contract to lessen the yearly cap hit.

The obvious benchmark for such a contract would be Richards' 12-year contract, signed in December 07 at $5.75/year.

Given how I expressed my belief that the NHL market is down from that season, and that teams sign super-long deals to lessen the cap hit, maybe Carter will sign for closer to $5 million flat, or even less? Hopefully that's not just wishful thinkiing, but we shall see.

UPDATE: David Backes signs with Blues for $4.5m/year. Seems an awful lot for a guy who hit 31 goals 2 years ago, but only 17 last year and 2 in 14 games this year. Can't help the Flyers negotiating position with Carter...

The "smartest" player on the Flyers

In terms of hockey IQ, Claude Giroux is staking his claim as the smartest, or the most innate playmaker on the team. While Leino is a crafty forward, and Timonen likely knows what an attacker will do before the attacker does, Giroux is making some special plays. Not just in some kind of stickhandling wizardry, but often in creating without having to do some fancy dipsy-do.

Two recent plays bear this out;

-Last night against the Hurricanes, with the game admittedly well in hand and the Canes coming apart, Giroux received a gift of a dreadful outlet pass, and broke in 2-on-1. The defender seemed to forget how to play hockey for a moment, and Giroux walked in, then passed over to Richards for an easy goal.

It all seems relatively simply, but the real beauty is the timing. He didn't rush into space and barrel in on the keeper, nor did he decide to pass early on in the play. He calmy took the space the defenders gave him, waiting for the goalie to commit, and timed his pass perfectly on the off-beat where the goalie is stepping towards and has no ability to change directions to the other attacker. It's like wrong-footing a goalie in soccer--seems simple or even lucky, but there's a delicate timing to it, and the best scorers do it to goalies over and over.

-Another more flashy example;

Again, the real play isn't the blind spin-around pass, it's the awareness to make a pass without having to look. Giroux goes after the puck knowing all the penalty-killers are committed to one side of the ice, and that he has a teammate looking pretty lonely, all alone on the other side. Once he wins the puck, it's basically a matter of anticipating where your teammate should be. Sometimes those passes won't work, but at the tail end of a PP, it's a worth risk worth taking.

Of course it doesn't hurt that both those plays were finished by that player that maybe has the second best hockey IQ on the team, Mike Richards.

Youthful quickness can make any player appear hockey "smarter", but these are some impressive, subtle plays, that are signs of a confident player who will likely produce offense for a long time.

Giroux resigns - what does it mean for Carter's value?

Somewhat without warning, Claude Giroux signed a new contract with the Flyers this week. He will get a hefty raise and the Flyers will lock him up for 3 years at cap number of $3.75 million. Giroux get his well deserved money, and the Flyers will still retain his RFA rights when this deal expires. Huzzah for everyone!!

Of course the more interesting question is what does this mean for the squad as a whole, and most importantly, resigning Jeff Carter. While opinions differ amongst Flyers fans on just how good Carter is, he's led the team in goals the last 2 years, and is at the point in his career when most players see big raises. The big caveat to all this however is that the NHL salary market has kind of tanked in the last few years.

Giroux's deal itself spells this out. Former first round pick, aged 22, coming off a 47 point regular season, and a big playoff run with 21 points in 23 games. What's it worth in 2010? $3.75 million.

On the other hand, at age 23 in 2008, Carter got $5 million for virtually the same credentials: former first round pick, 53 point regular season, 12 points in 17 playoffs games. Jeff Carter may have been a little more hyped as a prospect due to his AHL and WJC success, but Giroux has arguably accomplished more at the NHL level than Carter did at the time of his contract.

So blah blah blah. What I take from this is that Jeff Carter's coming off a contract that, at today's market prices, would've been worth $3.75-$4 million dollars. So even if he gets a small nominal raise (say just over $5 million), it's essentially a significant real value raise. (Not that I expect any comments on this, but please no one disturb this surely impeccable analysis)

You have to expect Carter and his agent will ask for $6+ million based on nominal figures, but the Flyers cap space isn't exactly plentiful and the Flyers will probably try to rely on depressed market prices. The heady days of 2007/08 with Jeff Finger (now in the AHL) signing for $3.5 million/year, or Thomas Vanek getting $7+ million for one breakout year are gone, at least for now. This is the new reality of contracts for NHL forwards in 2010:

-Joe Thornton ($7m)
-Bobby Ryan ($5.1m)
-Alex Steen ($3.4)
-Ollli Jokinen ($3m)
-Vaclav Prospal ($2.1m)
-Saku Koivu ($2.5m)
-Tanguay ($1.7)

I'm expecting Carter to come in at $5.25-5.75 million on his new deal. And based on some rumblings last week, it might be signed sooner rather than later.

Then Flyers fan can start to worry about signing Leino....