Enough?

Posted by Lindas1st from New England on 12/01/09 at 04:22 PM ET

He’s listed as day-to-day with an injury.

I guess the question is does the suspension start after he’s cleared to play or will he be suspended for two games he would miss with an injury anyway?

Posted by AvsRock from My timeshare in insanity... on 12/01/09 at 04:27 PM ET

Yes AvsRock, and what is the point of a suspension if the player couldn’t play those games anyway? I have that bad feeling that the suspension will not take into account Ovechkin maybe not playing either those games.

Two games is good. I think three would be pretty good. One’s not enough, four is really pushing it, and five would be way too far.

Posted by Nathan from BC on 12/01/09 at 04:31 PM ET

Well this at least lays down the groundwork for future incidents. 

One telling sign that OV does not get it is when a reporter asked him if he was going to change his game or not and his response was : “Why should i change my game because other people say someone is going to kill me.  No one is going to kill me”.  The issue is not if you get hurt OV, it is that you do not respect the other players enough to consider their well-being.

Posted by Gretzky_to_Lemieux on 12/01/09 at 04:36 PM ET

Well, it’s always difficult to gauge objectively. It’s fine by me. Two games doesn’t sound like much, and may not matter much given the injury (though I’m unsure about the actual procedure in such a situation), but the NHL has awarded him an actual suspension. A necessary signal to him and others. If it happens again, the NHL will have a harder time ignoring it and has to consider a punishment that isn’t symbolic. It’s progress in the magnitude of baby steps.

Posted by Moq from Denmark on 12/01/09 at 04:37 PM ET

seems fair to me as well.

i have to say, it is just hard for me to not LOVE ovechkin’s style of play. yeah, incidences like last night are an unfortunate byproduct of it, but how often does a player with his statistical abilities pour their heart and soul into the game the way this kid does. he plays with utter reckless abandonment, purely for the joy of it.

it’s amazing actually. i’m sure the capitals are pretty anxious about it. let’s face it, he is going to do some damage through the years with this style of play. but, man is he refreshing for hockey. i know some people out there don’t like him and think he’s ‘dirty’ which is entirely an oversimplification. he’s not dirty, he’s reckless. there really is a difference. he is so excited and exciting to watch, i really can’t complain as a fan of the game.

but, he will hurt others and he will hurt himself again. there’s no doubt about it. it really will take a toll on his career stats too, but he will put on a show and dare others to match his enthusiasm and energy.

he is the face of the league, like it or not - despite the hopeful whines emanating out of central Pennsylvania. i think the league is probably conflicted about the tightrope he is walking, but trying to restrain him could really backfire in a lot of ways.

Posted by perfection from LaLaLand on 12/01/09 at 04:51 PM ET

And it also forces the forfeiture of pay. For a guy who was so concerned about his escrow payment reducing his millions, this might have an impact on how he plays in the future.

Posted by Nate A from Detroit-ish on 12/01/09 at 04:53 PM ET

This puts him in the “prior offender” category and it gives him two games off to heal while he “serves” his suspension. Whether he’s healthy or not it still hits him in the pocket. So the NHL went with the easy way out. Not surprised although I thought he merited more considering all of the previous incidents that went unpenalized.

Posted by Hockey1919 from Montreal on 12/01/09 at 04:54 PM ET

He would have gotten five if his injury was worse.

I said this was going to happen.  It gives the league a way to say that only we tin foil hat wearers talk about a double-standard without them actually losing out on ticket sales any more than they would have because of his injury.

Posted by J.J. from Kansas on 12/01/09 at 04:55 PM ET

The difference between Laraque and Ovechkin (besides the obvious talent disparity)—Laraque got suspended for his previous infractions, Ovechkin didn’t.

Ovechkin should sit for at least 5 games.

Posted by Nathan from the scoresheet! on 12/01/09 at 05:04 PM ET

Well, it’s officially the next two games, Thursday and Saturday, according to nhl.com.  I presume the suspension only would have been put off because of the knee injury if he’d been placed on IR.  Without that, I don’t see what they can do.

Posted by nosferatu from oh on 12/01/09 at 05:12 PM ET

So I assume we’ll hear about Gleason’s suspension for boarding Mathieu Perreault and attempting to instigate 2 fights last night/3rd man in?

Didn’t think so.  Gleason’s boarding penalty was far worse than Ovechkin’s last week against noted skill player Paul Gaustad, yet he gets 2 minutes.  Double standard, anyone?

Posted by Right Winger from Washington, DC on 12/01/09 at 05:16 PM ET

Didn’t think so.  Gleason’s boarding penalty was far worse than Ovechkin’s last week against noted skill player Paul Gaustad, yet he gets 2 minutes.  Double standard, anyone?

Posted by Right Winger from Washington, DC on 12/01/09 at 05:16 PM ET

Wait, did you just insinuate that Ovechkin is on the wrong end of a double-standard as far as handing out suspensions in the NHL?

Posted by J.J. from Kansas on 12/01/09 at 05:24 PM ET

The suspension is a little light, but I think the biggest thing is that he is only ‘day-to-day’ with his knee injury. Where is the justice? He initiates the knee on knee and is only out a week, whereas Kronwall gets cheap shotted by a goon that shouldn’t be in the league and he’s out 2 months.

Posted by cainer4wingsglory on 12/01/09 at 05:27 PM ET

Wait, did you just insinuate that Ovechkin is on the wrong end of a double-standard as far as handing out suspensions in the NHL?

Talk about Bizarro World. “Htrae”

Posted by Lindas1st from New England on 12/01/09 at 05:53 PM ET

It gives the league a way to say that only we tin foil hat wearers talk about a double-standard without them actually losing out on ticket sales any more than they would have because of his injury.

But the very act of giving him a suspension, whether it’s one or fifty games means that next time, he’s a repeat offender.

I’m interested to see what happens then…

Posted by Garth on 12/01/09 at 10:24 PM ET

Is “I’m told” the new gold standard in journalistic citing?

Posted by Hippy Dave from Portland by way of Detroit on 12/01/09 at 11:36 PM ET

Wait, did you just insinuate that Ovechkin is on the wrong end of a double-standard as far as handing out suspensions in the NHL?

Ovechkin got what he deserved suspension-wise; however, the all-knowing media is quick to indict him as a dirty player while glossing over certain facts in the game.  The Kaleta hit was a minor penalty that the officials blew (shocking that the NHL has officials who can’t officiate…); the Gonchar hit was simply The Gooch forgetting that he had a second leg that should, in a perfect world, follow the rest of his body to avoid a hit. 

The Gleason hit was knee-on-knee and Ovechkin got what he deserved; however, he did it while in the course of setting up a perfectly legal shoulder check (head up, shoulder down) that Gleason ducked at the last minute (with good reason, i.e. he was about to get lit the F up).  2 games is enough, especially when you consider that Gleason was back on the bench and skating 5 minutes later.

Posted by Right Winger from Washington, DC on 12/02/09 at 10:12 AM ET