Sooooo many thoughts raised by Simmer’s comparison of how Vancouver Canucks winger Kiefer Sherwood’s recent antics would have been handled throughout various NHL decades.
If you haven’t read it, do so here, then come back. I’ll wait.
(La de dah, la de dah…)
Welcome back. My reactions:
(1) Simmer is spot-on. Firing into an empty net on a delayed penalty is a hockey etiquette no-no, akin to shooting the puck at a goalie after an offside whistle or the end of a period. Back before the NHL discouraged bench-clearing brawls, Sherwood would have been dog-piled like he was made of Milk Bones.
(2) As to why the Seattle Kraken didn’t retaliate – that’s not the makeup of this team, nor has it been for their 4 1/2 years of existence. For better or worse, they’re largely a bunch of honest, hard-working prairie boys who would rather skate, shoot, block and hit cleanly than react to perceived taunts.
(3) In this particular case, the penalty being whistled with 1:40 remaining in overtime, perhaps discretion was the better part of valor. The man advantage assured two things: first, the Kraken would have an excellent chance to win the game on a 4-on-3 power play (they didn’t); second, it virtually assured that the Canucks couldn’t win in overtime.
(4) Sherwood almost certainly had agitation in mind. He slammed the puck into the net, when a mere touch would have sufficed. If he could goad a Kraken into retaliation, that would have bailed the Canucks out of a penalty kill. A smart, if devious, strategy with – as Simmer points out – no downside in hockey as it’s played today.
Maybe this kind of nonsense could be eliminated without fisticuffs, if intentional bad manners were assessed a penalty already on the books: “unsportsmanlike conduct.”
(5) The smarter Kraken reaction would have been a long memory – or at least one that lasted five days.
At a far less crucial juncture of the Jan. 2 Kraken-Canucks rematch in Vancouver, Seattle could have delivered a “message” with a fist or a check. And there would have been time to recover if Vancouver had scored on the resulting power play.
Friday, in Seattle’s 4-3 shootout victory, Sherwood actually scored a Canucks 2nd period power play goal. But not because Seattle chose to go the retaliation route. As to why not… well, see point #2.
(6) Since the Kraken don’t have designated tough guys, stars are forced to do their own dirty work. For instance, top defenseman – $50 million defenseman – Brandon Montour landed on IR after a fight against the Colorado Avalanche’s Brent Burns.
Back to the Dec. 29 Kraken-Canucks game, Conor Garland nailed Jared McCann with a cheap-shot elbow to the face. On the ensuing faceoff, McCann invited Garland to drop the gloves, which they did.
(7) Seattle coach Lane Lambert said he was okay with McCann fighting his own battle.
I’m not.
McCann had just returned from a second stint on injured reserve. He’d played all of 11 games the entire season. McCann is a legitimate scoring threat the goal-challenged Kraken can ill-afford to be without.
Enforcing needs to fall to a Tye Kartye, Jacob Melanson, or a like-minded hungry 4th liner. Or maybe – cover your ears, Don Cherry fans – it should fall to nobody at all. I’ve got three letters why: C-T-E. Look it up, kids. There are many creative ways to get your point across without giving or receiving a fist to the skull. A clandestine stick between the legs, for instance, works just as well.
(8) One more reason fighting isn’t the right response to a cheap shot; it doesn’t make sense. Don’t, don’t, don’t give Garland credit for “answering the bell” in agreeing to throw down with McCann, not a known fighter.
Garland, who hit McCann in the face, is basically given carte blanche to DO IT AGAIN if he’s able.
If a player in Garland’s position really believed in an eye for an eye, he would have stood still, arms at his side, while McCann got to take a free shot. THAT would be “answering the bell.”
Earlier Kraken:
— Kraken Jump Into A Playoff Spot; Beat Pred’s 4-1
Earlier Canucks:
— Shoot-out Wizard Lankinen, Canucks Beat Kraken 3-2
Meanwhile … of Western Conference interest …
What liberal arts school did you go to. You sound like a woke victim. Or the head of the me too movement. You’re whole article trashes Sherwood while trying to tell us to turn the other cheek. Talk about all time hypocrisy and youre their leader. Im blown away that people actually pay you for your pathetic opinions.
I will pass this along to Glenn. He wrote it. He doesn’t mind a bit of constructive, or even non-constructive, analysis.
I don’t think that’s actually my daddy. My daddy knows the difference between “You’re” and “Your.”