Not sure if I’m surprised by this or not.
Xhekaj’s punch from behind didn’t really connect—so I guess it gets just a shrug from the league. But if he did hit him, it would have been a very similar blindside attack as the suckerpunch that Bertuzzi landed on Steve Moore. It’s only because he missed Paré that they both flailed to the ice.
Wish the league would’ve drawn more of a line in the sand that any suckerpunch or blindside punch is not acceptable. Regardless of whether there was a serious outcome or not. By being soft on this vigilante justice they will only encourage it to happen more often.
I think your last sentence is the key. The league sells a violence game with violent acts and it sells. It is in their financial interest to "encourage it to happen more often."
Some years ago in a lawsuit against the league an email chain between NHL executives became public in which NHL VP (in charge of player safety) Colin Campbell stated "We sell hate."
The purpose of the DOPS is ostensibly to protect the players, but I infer from it being soft on vigilante justice, being inconsistent and generally only meting out really serious penalties when actual damage takes place regardless of intent that protecting the players isn't really the main purpose. In my view they have the the DOPS and penalize when there is serious damage primarily to provide a defence to lawsuits and criticism, allowing the league to say it has rules against violence and a system in place to punish violent offenders while designing that system in such a way as to ineffective, leaving violence in the game well beyond what the rules permit and ensuring enough crap takes place that teams really don't like each other.
The concern seems to be that seriously reducing the violence would reduce the number of viewers paying for tickets, buying merchandise and watching or listening on tv and other media.