GDT: GM#64 LA Kings vs Vegas Golden Knights @7:30

[RONNIEC]

Forbort hit looked clean. Doughty's is 50/50.

Reaves penalties pretty much sunk whatever chance Vegas had at a comeback. Not giving your team a chance to mount a comeback could be considered losing a game. Just because they were down a few goals doesn't mean they were done. Need you be reminded of the King's previous two games?

Edit: Also, anyone notice Faust is slightly homerish even in national broadcast? He shows enthusiasm for both teams scoring but there are subtle things like calling faceoff wins. For example, on one face off, I remember him calling it as Mitchell losing vs Vegas winning

I want to second to @BigKing

They have 87 points!!!!
When they put Reaves on the ice that much on the 3rd period, their intention was pretty clear... they priority WAS NOT to get a tie/win, but had Reaves to cause troubles, better injuries, take the edge and win the mental game.
I am not saying they tried to throw away 2 points, but 2 points for them was/is affordable. They focused on something else than the 2 points.

My guess is, if they were leading 3-1, most likely Reaves wouldn't be flying around but tried to close out the game.

 

[BigKing]

Been watching hockey for almost 30 years. The conclusions from that blog are wrong.

As for the rough on Doughty, it is because he gave him a little wash with his glove and Doughty sold it. Smart sell by Doughty in that situation.

If you want to say any of the Reaves penalties were penalties "by the book", then you are saying that the entire game should be marred by a penalty call every 10 seconds since that would be what calling a game strictly "by the book" would entail.

 

[bob77]

I thought the penalty he got on Doughty was when he glanced the check up to Drew's dome, they'd better call that every time, especially after they missed him butt-ending Kopitar in the face when he was on the Blues.

Not convinced the one on Forbort was actually a penalty but if they would have called it a charge I wouldn't have blinked.

I too did not like the attempt at Folin's head when they took each other down.

It was really clear what Reaves was there to do and why Gallant put him out there. I dig old school message-sending hockey but he wasn't playing hockey, he was literally trying to get called for penalties, the refs just indulged him.

The DD one was a high elbow attempt. Could have been dangerous. The Forbort hit was clean, but you can’t come full speed from the red line and drill a guy. He took about six strides, set himself and delivered the hit, all in a straight line. It was charging. They don’t seem to use that term or penalty call anymore. Bottom line, the complete finish your check concept is slowly leaving the game. Many are called late hits or interference. Forbort was stunned, but shook it off and played fine down the stretch. Reaves stick and arms came up high to finish out the check also. They easily could have called it a head shot, but that probably would have been wrong. Either way, Forbort got his clock cleaned.

 

[SettlementRichie10]

Forbort hit was textbook charging by today’s standards. Is what it is. They don’t want guys lining up hits like that anymore. Plain and simple. Too easy for things to go wrong. If Forbort trips last minute, Reaves is already too committed to the check, and Forbort’s head is hammered into the boards.

They’re taking hits like that out of the game because they’re stupid and unnecessary and dangerous. It doesn’t have anything to do with machismo or anything else. Peoples’ liveliehoods were being ruined by a dumb f***ing game, and the league doesn’t want to enable that anymore.