GLENDALE, AZ - MAY 15: Dustin Brown #23 of the Los Angeles Kings lays on the ice after being checked from behind into the end boards by Martin Hanzal #11 of the Phoenix Coyotes (not in photo) in the third period of Game Two of the Western Conference Final during the 2012 NHL Stanley Cup Playoffs at Jobing.com Arena on May 15, 2012 in Phoenix, Arizona. Hanzal received a 5-minute major boarding penalty. The Kings defeated the Coyotes 4-0. (Photo by Christian Petersen/Getty Images)
The Shanaban video after the jump:
So the NHL is obviously still penalizing to injury. If Brown were injured we'd see a longer suspension. Seems a little ridiculous to me since if Brown were say Kyle Clifford, the Kings could have just sent him back to the room for "concussion testing" or whatever and sat him for a few days. Since it's Brown though he doesn't miss a shift and Hanzal only get's a game. The more valueable a player is to their team, the less the likelihood of a team sitting that player with a borderline injury. Thus, the NHL seems to have a bad policy if it's their intent to protect their most valueable assets. It's not only exploitable in that teams can fake injuries when a more valueable player takes a run at a less valueable player, but also what if Dustin Brown does have a mild concussion right now? He is not going to sit, nor would the team be very motivated to have him sit. Having a blanket policy penalizing to injury seems like not the best way to do it given that players have differing values to their team.
Anyhow, what do you guys think about Hanzal's sentence?
Do you agree with the NHL ruling on the Hanzal Boarding infraction? Why or why not?
Yes -- 1 game seems about right. (59 votes)
No --- He should have gotten more time. (112 votes)
171 total votes