Erin Brown and Greg Cimilluca of CBSSports.com provide analysis on three topics.
| Should a player's actions before reaching the NHL be considered when issuing fines or suspensions? | |
| Greg Cimilluca | Erin Brown |
 Wouldn't it be great if we could get the NHL's view on this question? I give you Colin Campbell: "That's an issue that we have to deal with the NHL Players Association. ... Right now, we're only allowed to look at the record in our league and how they play and act in our league." OK, good luck with that, Coly. I think the real core issue here is: If they are trying to deter the type of play that has come to the forefront, then what difference does it make if a player was clean(ish) before some recent loss of brain power that could significantly injure another player? I don't need to know the past of a player who wants to perform a Matt Johnson/Todd Bertuzzi-esque attack to know that it doesn't have a place in the NHL. They need to up the ante on suspensions while allowing the legal bone-crushers to do their thing; the physical element is a necessity in the game. |  If the league is truly trying to crack down on violent actions that injure players, taking a player's history into account, regardless of league, seems like the next logical step. Ask yourself this: If the NHL paid attention to a player's past, would Jesse Boulerice have thought twice about smashing Ryan Kesler's face? Would Steve Downie have delivered a cheap shot to the head of Dean McAmmond just to gain a roster spot? The players guilty of these on-ice crimes weren't first-time offenders over the span of their careers. Boulerice was charged with assault after taking a baseball-style swing at an opponent's face in an OHL game. Downie had his share of unsportsmanlike incidents during his junior days, including an altercation with a teammate during practice that resulted in a five-game suspension. These incidents were warnings for the NHL, and it's time for the league to start recognizing them instead of ignoring them. |
| Just two weeks into the season, which GM/coach is feeling the most heat? | |
| Greg Cimilluca | Erin Brown |
| Well recent NHL news forces me to at least address the situation in Atlanta (note to all: It's OK to refer to Atlanta as Atlanta and not "Hotlanta" or "The ATL" as has become stylish these days). The Thrashers have fired coach Bob Hartley after a dismal 0-6 start. While winless is not good, this is also not the NFL, where your season is pretty much over at that point. After he led the Thrashers to their first playoff appearance in franchise history last season, Hartley was eliminated from employment despite not having one of his best players in the lineup most nights (Marian Hossa) and certain players not playing up to spec (cough: Lehtonen). It makes me wonder if there was something behind the scenes in addition to the sloppy start that predicated this move. You might as well throw in Brent Sutter on the list. Seemingly anything short of winning every game is potential firing fodder for GM Lou Lamoriello. | The Leafs are off to a 2-3-2 start, and reports out of Toronto suggest higher-ups are not pleased. That can't bode well for GM John Ferguson Jr. or coach Paul Maurice, who was in damage control mode following a sub-par preseason. Illness aside, Jason Blake has yet to have a significant impact offensively. Newcomer Vesa Toskala, who was viewed as a solution to the team's inconsistency in net, has only contributed to the problem. And the porous defense, highlighted by Bryan McCabe's own-goal in a hard-fought 5-4 loss to Buffalo, is not making life any easier in Toronto. Having to answer to some of the league's most passionate fans doesn't exactly quell the situation, either. Atlanta is trying to right its ship by firing Bob Hartley after a 0-6-0 start, but that doesn't take the heat off GM Don Waddell. If the Thrashers don't turn things around soon, team management could end up dumping him as well. |
| Should the Kings have sent goalie Jonathan Bernier back to juniors? | |
| Greg Cimilluca | Erin Brown |
| There are so many angles one can take -- not least of which is the need for reform of junior/AHL eligibility rules. Is playing in juniors the best thing for Bernier's development? Probably not. He has demonstrated clearly that he has the ability to play at a higher level in international and organizational play. But the Kings don't want to rush the prodigy while the team is floundering, so the perfect solution would be to allow him to gain quality minutes in a league that will test him most nights. Makes sense, right? Well, under current rules, the Kings (and Bernier) don't have that option and are left sending him back to juniors, where his development will not be addressed as readily. So while I have no problems with the Kings protecting a young asset, I think it's this situation and the several like it that seem to pop up ever year that need to be addressed and changed so organizations can prepare their prospects as they see fit. | Los Angeles is in desperate need of a true No. 1 goaltender, and Jonathan Bernier is that player ... in a couple of seasons. Some might question this move because of the veteran poise Bernier displayed over his first four games. Had he stayed, though, the 19-year-old would have shouldered more responsibility than he should really at this point. Playing behind a team that, while improved, is still looking for its identity is no way for a youngster to develop. By sending Bernier back to Lewiston of the QMJHL, it gives him a chance to continue developing his game without added pressure. Bernier, who missed out on playing for the Canadian Junior team last season, also gets another shot at making the 2008 squad to compete against the best of his peers on the world stage. In the meantime, Los Angeles will just have to suffer with having two backup-type goalies. |
