Toggle sidebar

Kadri

  • Work is still on-going to rebuild the site styling and features. Please report any issues you may experience so we can look into it. Click Here for Updates
cinchronicity said:
True, but in between this week, and the last Kadri punishment, Reaves has been fined twice and suspended twice. What about Tom Wilson? He has the same exact amount of suspensions as Kadri, including one this year, barely two months prior to the Panarin situation. Kadri's last suspension was in 2019. His fines have been for embellishment, not violence. So what, precisely, is a repeat offender and how does Bettman make that decision? The Scheifele hit was far worse than the Kadri hit. So why does 1 get 8 and the other 4? It has to be a repeat offender theme. But then how are Wilson and Reaves explained? Both are worse htis. Both have similar disciplinary issues. Both have been suspended more recently than Kadri.

I think Kadri should have gotten 4 or 5. But 8 is fine with me, as long as everyone else guilty of similar infractions and similar histories get 8 as well.
Click to expand...
Well the Wilson thing the NHL screwed up and got it wrong. As for Reaves vs Kadri that is purely due to suspension history. Kadri has a way longer suspension history than Reaves and his most recent playoff suspension was 5 games, so the next one was basically guaranteed to be more than 5.
 
wayninja said:
Ok, maybe I was just confused as to what exactly was being discussed. I'm not sure anyone cares how much actual money Kadri et al are losing per missed game, we care about the number of games being missed.

But if I'm going to be pedantic (and clearly I am), if the history still matters when it comes to length of suspension, then losing less per game is moot if you are suspended for longer. E.g. "repeat offender" tag, despite no longer being present, is still costing you more money.
Click to expand...
Like I said they could change the name to make it more clear.
 
The Abusement Park said:
Like I said they could change the name to make it more clear.
Click to expand...

Maybe. But I'm not sure the name is what makes it confusing. How this is being applied makes it confusing. If the disciplinary review is an arbitrary, "informal" process in which there are no clear demonstrable guidelines, but the amount of money taken from each game has clear, objective rules, then the problem isn't really with how you are labeling it.
 
wayninja said:
Maybe. But I'm not sure the name is what makes it confusing. How this is being applied makes it confusing. If the disciplinary review is an arbitrary, "informal" process in which there are no clear demonstrable guidelines, but the amount of money taken from each game has clear, objective rules, then the problem isn't really with how you are labeling it.
Click to expand...
I don't know what to tell you. That's just how it is and how it's applied. I don't find it to be that confusing.
 
Wild guess but kadri will be reduced from 8 to 6 games. And we’ll find that out on Monday afternoon. After he’s sat for .... six games.
 
  • Like
Reactions: cannucky
The Abusement Park said:
Well the Wilson thing the NHL screwed up and got it wrong. As for Reaves vs Kadri that is purely due to suspension history. Kadri has a way longer suspension history than Reaves and his most recent playoff suspension was 5 games, so the next one was basically guaranteed to be more than 5.
Click to expand...
so its not jus the history of the suspensions but the NUMBER of games suspended kinda thing? so reaves gets off lightly even though he has been recently suspended, but for only fewer games than kadri in the past....
 
The Abusement Park said:
Well the Wilson thing the NHL screwed up and got it wrong. As for Reaves vs Kadri that is purely due to suspension history. Kadri has a way longer suspension history than Reaves and his most recent playoff suspension was 5 games, so the next one was basically guaranteed to be more than 5.
Click to expand...

Again, not arguing as much as playing devil's advocate. IIRC, Kadri's last suspension was for his retaliation to the Marleau hit. That was completely unnecessary, and Kadri took advantage of his stick and the boards to deliver retaliation for something totally unrelated to the play at the time. His current hit was not the same. It was ill-timed and unnecessary, but it was not 'dirty', nor of the same substance as his last suspension. But let's take your supposition as accurate, and I really have no issue with the NHL saying that any new suspension is going to be 2/4/6 games more than your previous suspension. But then I go back to Reaves, who only got 2 games for what amounts to 2 separate game misconducts. He was suspended in the last playoffs! That is a full year more proximate than Kadri's last suspension. But since that was only 1 game , the DoPS uses that fact to justify adding 1 this time to make it 2? Reaves and Kadri actually have similarly checkered past. Yet Kadri gets +3 over his last suspension 2 years ago, and Reaves gets +1 over his last suspension ( which was an absurdly low amount anyway.) The problem here is that Reaves now has a baseline of 2 games. So if he kneels on someone's neck, or crosschecks a goalie in the head, do they just base it on his previous behavior? It seems like that was the case this time. Would he have gotten 8 games if his last offense was 5 instead of 2?

My only desire is transparency and continuity. Short of that, the NHL becomes a joke like the NBA. Kadri's previous suspensions were in 2013,15,18 and 19. 2013 is a pretty long time ago - twice the length of a typical NHL career according to the league. Kadri's biggest flaw is that he is such a knucklehead, he keeps on making dumb decisions during the playoffs, when everyone is looking.
 
jabubenice said:
so its not jus the history of the suspensions but the NUMBER of games suspended kinda thing? so reaves gets off lightly even though he has been recently suspended, but for only fewer games than kadri in the past....
Click to expand...
I mean yeah? The more your get suspended the bigger your suspensions will get. I feel like that seems to be a pretty reasonable standard.
 
The Abusement Park said:
I mean yeah? The more your get suspended the bigger your suspensions will get. I feel like that seems to be a pretty reasonable standard.
Click to expand...
not if you dont account for the seriousness of the offence. Someone like reaves/wilson are habitual line crossers but if their punishment is dictated by the history of the length of past offences then thats not right. if reaves/wilson knock a player out or punch and knee a player on the ice but have only been suspended for an average of two games in the past were as kadri commits lesser offence (my opinion) but because in the past he has been suspended 5 or more games so it follows he should face more games even if its for a lessor offence (in my opinion). imagine if our judicial court systems dealt out justice and sentences on that philosophy....

p.s. not justifying kadri in anyway here, jus playin the devils advocate to show how silly the whole disciplinary thing is
 
  • Like
Reactions: Vk1ing, Garthinater and Colorado Avalanche
wayninja said:
It's not unreasonable, but it's also not a "standard." If it's applied discretionally, then it's just not a standard, by any definition.
Click to expand...
I mean outside this most recent Wilson situation that the NHL got wrong... that is the standard.
 
Explain how a first time offender with a grand total of 12 pims this season and who has never had a charging penalty only had 1 boarding penalty in a 600 game career gets 4 games for a legal hockey hit ?
 
cannucky said:
Explain how a first time offender with a grand total of 12 pims this season and who has never had a charging penalty only had 1 boarding penalty in a 600 game career gets 4 games for a legal hockey hit ?
Click to expand...

Do you understand what charging is?
 
AvsMakaw8 said:
Do you understand what charging is?
Click to expand...

The problem with Charging is that it is by far the most subjective penalty in any organized sport. 200 feet head start does seem like a lot. So what is acceptable? 180? 100? 60? If 60 is OK, does that mean 64 is a penalty? What about speed? Mackinnon can accelerate far faster in 60 feet than Nemeth can in 200. What about inertia and the effect of mass?

I'm not saying Scheifele should not have gotten a penalty. But I do feel that the line he crossed is very blurry. If he was checking Chara/ Ovi / Byfuglian / even Nuke for crying out loud - it's entirely possible they don't even fall. So does a player need to take the time to calculate vector forces on his TI-95 before making a check? Scheifele made a bad decision in what was ( and I timed it myself on video) .2 of a second. If he just stopped skating, he would have been lambasted for lack of effort to stop the game clinching goal. I could see a 5 minute penalty. I could even see a 10 minute misconduct. I'll even go for a 2 game suspension just to let the league know that charging is going to come with a painful penalty. What I don't see is how Scheifele gets 4 for what was a hockey play gone wrong, and Reaves gets 2 for doing the same thing that sent Derek Chauvin to jail.
 
cinchronicity said:
The problem with Charging is that it is by far the most subjective penalty in any organized sport. 200 feet head start does seem like a lot. So what is acceptable? 180? 100? 60? If 60 is OK, does that mean 64 is a penalty? What about speed? Mackinnon can accelerate far faster in 60 feet than Nemeth can in 200. What about inertia and the effect of mass?

I'm not saying Scheifele should not have gotten a penalty. But I do feel that the line he crossed is very blurry. If he was checking Chara/ Ovi / Byfuglian / even Nuke for crying out loud - it's entirely possible they don't even fall. So does a player need to take the time to calculate vector forces on his TI-95 before making a check? Scheifele made a bad decision in what was ( and I timed it myself on video) .2 of a second. If he just stopped skating, he would have been lambasted for lack of effort to stop the game clinching goal. I could see a 5 minute penalty. I could even see a 10 minute misconduct. I'll even go for a 2 game suspension just to let the league know that charging is going to come with a painful penalty. What I don't see is how Scheifele gets 4 for what was a hockey play gone wrong, and Reaves gets 2 for doing the same thing that sent Derek Chauvin to jail.
Click to expand...
Schief is listed at 6'3", 207 lbs. He's no delicate flower. That's a lot of hockey player coming at you at full speed, that would knock anybody flying when he comes in full speed.
 
cinchronicity said:
The problem with Charging is that it is by far the most subjective penalty in any organized sport. 200 feet head start does seem like a lot. So what is acceptable? 180? 100? 60? If 60 is OK, does that mean 64 is a penalty? What about speed? Mackinnon can accelerate far faster in 60 feet than Nemeth can in 200. What about inertia and the effect of mass?

I'm not saying Scheifele should not have gotten a penalty. But I do feel that the line he crossed is very blurry. If he was checking Chara/ Ovi / Byfuglian / even Nuke for crying out loud - it's entirely possible they don't even fall. So does a player need to take the time to calculate vector forces on his TI-95 before making a check? Scheifele made a bad decision in what was ( and I timed it myself on video) .2 of a second. If he just stopped skating, he would have been lambasted for lack of effort to stop the game clinching goal. I could see a 5 minute penalty. I could even see a 10 minute misconduct. I'll even go for a 2 game suspension just to let the league know that charging is going to come with a painful penalty. What I don't see is how Scheifele gets 4 for what was a hockey play gone wrong, and Reaves gets 2 for doing the same thing that sent Derek Chauvin to jail.
Click to expand...
That you keep defending that hit is just mind blowing to me. To each his own I guess.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Vk1ing
This has probably already been discussed, what's the point of an arbitrator's involvement if it's going to take the same time period as Bettmans did?
 
Coffeeguy said:
This has probably already been discussed, what's the point of an arbitrator's involvement if it's going to take the same time period as Bettmans did?
Click to expand...
Potential for less games, the neutral arbitrator has in the past ruled in favour of the players more often than not.

With that said, it is utterly pointless if the arbitrator "reduces" the suspension from 8 games down to 6 or 7 yet takes several days to make the decision whereby Kadri will have potentially already served 6/7/8 games.

Sunday is going to be his 6th game served, and I'm not expecting a decision from this arbitrator any time soon.
 
  • Like
Reactions: jabubenice
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Top Bottom