Marchand Suspended 5 Games

Ed Hillel

Wants to be startin somethin
SoSH Member
Dec 12, 2007
43,898
Here
Five games is fair. He elbowed the guy in the side of the head intentionally and has a long rapsheet. He has a dumb side he just can’t kick.
 

RetractableRoof

tolerates intolerance
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Dec 1, 2003
3,836
Quincy, MA
I think 5 is excessive, had figured 1-3. I figure he deserves 3 - or said another way I would want 3 if someone did that to Krejci or Krug. I hope he appeals it and it is lowered to 3.

Agreed with others, he needs to knock off this part of his game. The team doesn't need it, and given the timing with McAvoy down, it is selfish to have done it and weaken the team.
 

Boston Brawler

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 17, 2011
9,762
I think he needs to appeal and hope it gets reduced. I figured 3 max based on reputation.

Maybe they did 5 expecting an appeal and reduction. And that means next time 5 will stick.
 

TheRealness

Member
SoSH Member
Feb 8, 2006
11,695
The Dirty Shire
He deserves 5 because of how totally unneeded it was. He went out of his way to elbow him in the face. Just an incredibly stupid move that was selfish and short sighted.

I was hoping for less, but I’m nonplussed by the five games. He was an idiot for doing it.
 

Salem's Lot

Andy Moog! Andy God Damn Moog!
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
14,606
Gallows Hill
It's probably 2 games too much but hopefully now he realizes the league is going to hammer him if he does this shit. He's not Crosby, he's not going to get away with whatever he wants.
 

PedroSpecialK

Comes at you like a tornado of hair and the NHL sa
SoSH Member
Dec 12, 2004
27,167
Cambridge, MA
Not much to complain about IMO given how often he finds himself in these unnecessary situations.

I thought he'd get off lighter given some of the plausible deniability but can't say he hasn't earned this.
 

TheoShmeo

Skrub's sympathy case
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Jul 19, 2005
12,890
Boston, NY
Five seems pretty excessive to me given the nature of the elbow. It’s not as if he ran a guy into the boards or it wasn’t in the middle of a play. I get that he has a history but five just seems like it’s too tied to the past. I assume it’s designed to morph into 3-4.
 

Kenny F'ing Powers

posts way less than 18% useful shit
SoSH Member
Nov 17, 2010
14,472
Not much to complain about IMO given how often he finds himself in these unnecessary situations.

I thought he'd get off lighter given some of the plausible deniability but can't say he hasn't earned this.
This is where I'm at. I expected less, but I'm sick of this shit from him. Maybe 5 gets the point across.
 

cshea

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 15, 2006
36,183
306, row 14
I’m fine with 5. It was worth 2-3 on its own and he gets extra for his extensive history. He does this once a year. He can’t shake it, and it sucks.

Also, he can’t appeal.
 

savage362

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 16, 2003
1,389
Vermont
Does anyone see a bit of a toe-pick by Marchand just before he falls and swings his arm/elbow? When I initially saw the play I thought he was trying to stop and caught an edge that sent him flying off balance and happened to make contact with Johansson. After seeing more replays from different angles, I still buy the toe-pick but I'll also buy into the exaggerated flailing of the arms. I would have given him 3 games but reputation....
 

scotian1

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 19, 2005
16,371
Kingston, Nova Scotia
Look I love Marchand but it was a deliberate vicious elbow to the head and he is a repeat offender. Commentators here on Sportsnet have been discussing it all day and think he is fortunate to have gotten only 5. He has been known to give cheap shots and he is too good a player to be doing that shit.
 

HurstSoGood

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Dec 14, 2006
2,186
The only "I'm really not-guilty" explanation is that he (Brad) was expecting hard contact from the NJ defender as he broke right to avoid the keeper. The defender pulled up safely. So rather than taking a shoulder to shoulder shot (in which Brad's arm would never have risen above the shoulder), the checking motion of Brad's arm continued...unchecked... and extended up and into the side of the defenseman's head.

And then there are the 99 reasons to suspect guilt and explain the cheapness of the elbow.
 

LogansDad

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 15, 2006
29,683
Alamogordo
Yeah, I can't disagree with this too much. Head shots need to be removed from the game, and there was clearly intent behind the elbow. Maybe he didn't mean to hit him in the head, but he did, so he needs to suffer the consequences.
 

Jordu

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 30, 2003
8,990
Brookline
Five suspensions before this one. The league says that was a factor. It should be. The next one is going to be longer.

I hope Cassidy, Bergeron and everyone on the team make it clear to Marchand at every opportunity how much he is letting his teammates down.
 

Bob Montgomerys Helmet Hat

has big, douchey shoulders
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Five suspensions before this one. The league says that was a factor. It should be. The next one is going to be longer.

I hope Cassidy, Bergeron and everyone on the team make it clear to Marchand at every opportunity how much he is letting his teammates down.
I just wonder if he's capable of controlling himself. It's impulse control, not stopping a premeditated plot, so how does he change in the heat of battle? I really don't know.
 

TheoShmeo

Skrub's sympathy case
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Jul 19, 2005
12,890
Boston, NY
I just wonder if he's capable of controlling himself. It's impulse control, not stopping a premeditated plot, so how does he change in the heat of battle? I really don't know.
And if he does pull it off, and relax that part of how he functions, does it have any spillover affect on the rest of his performance? While it’s understandable to say that a little impulse control shouldn’t detract from everything else, maybe things aren’t that readily divisible.
 

TheoShmeo

Skrub's sympathy case
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Jul 19, 2005
12,890
Boston, NY
Do you mean like the dropoff in production from missing 5 games?
Ha. No I mean that sometimes the jerk in a player is all bound up in everything else, so if you tame the jerk, everything else suffers, too. But you probably know what I meant.
 

The Napkin

wise ass al kaprielian
Moderator
SoSH Member
Jul 13, 2002
28,614
right here
Someone on T&R just said you can't appeal 5 and under. Is that true? Not sure I've ever heard that before.

Here's the thing about him getting 5. In a vacuum given history and all it's fine I suppose. But it just continues the completely arbitrary nature of nhl discipline. Yes he's been suspended before. But at least one was something that others doing the same thing haven't been suspended for on the basis that they hadn't been suspended before. Which doesn't really make sense. Rinaldo skates up and sucker punches someone with intent and gets 6. That's just 1 game worse than an elbow during play (or at least right as a whistle went)? Brown gets nothing for cross checking from behind into the boards. Ovechkin boards Carlo, knocking him out of the playoffs, and gets nothing because he's not a "repeat offender" despite getting nothing for not being a repeat offender over and over and over agin. And on and on and on. DOPS is a joke and everyone knows it. Why is this so hard to fix?
 

mauf

Anderson Cooper × Mr. Rogers
Moderator
SoSH Member
I thought his intent was ambiguous, but it seems like folks here who know the sport better than I do thought it was clear enough.

If you think the elbow was intentional, 5 games is light for a habitual offender.
 

ngruz25

Bibby
SoSH Member
Sep 20, 2005
19,037
Pittsburgh, PA
I don't know that he was intentionally trying to hit the guy in the head with his elbow. I do think that he was intentionally using his elbow to body up on the guy.

So, he was intentionally elbowing a guy. That elbow ended up in the guy's head. Whether he meant for the elbow to connect with Johansson's head (as opposed to his shoulder or chest) is really immaterial to me.

It's a reputation penalty because Marchand has earned a reputation. There is nothing to complain about. He's an extremely talented but stupidly dirty player. That's his game and I don't know how you can argue otherwise.
 

NickEsasky

Please Hammer, Don't Hurt 'Em
Silver Supporter
SoSH Member
Jul 24, 2001
9,204
Exactly. Marchand reaps what he sowed. Stop doing shitty stuff like this and he won't have to worry about being suspended. It's bad for the team, and it tarnishes the reputation of a guy who works hard and is supremely talented.
 

timlinin8th

Member
SoSH Member
Jun 6, 2009
1,521
...gets nothing because he's not a "repeat offender" despite getting nothing for not being a repeat offender over and over and over agin. And on and on and on. DOPS is a joke and everyone knows it. Why is this so hard to fix?
The repeat offender rules are collectively bargained so that throws a monkey wrench in the works a bit, but I’m with you that the “repeating non-repeat offender” stuff makes me crazy. Hopefully the next CBA tightens up that if a player is constantly having to justify themselves to DOPS that it starts to count against them in some way vs only having been suspended before.

That said superstars are always going to get more of the benefit of the doubt just because.
 

LogansDad

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 15, 2006
29,683
Alamogordo
I can't find a place to link it from, but Marchand gave what was, in my opinion, a seriously gutsy interview yesterday (I saw it on the Bruins Facebook page). He stood in front of his locker for 5 minutes getting grilled by the media, and facing various questions from letting his teammates down to players in the league not respecting him. He answered every question very candidly, and it seemed honestly ("The league changed from when I came up, and I didn't adjust fast enough" is a snippet).

I absolutely think he deserves the suspension he has gotten, but I think most of us would agree that he has worked hard to clean up his game. I don't think he was trying to decapitate Johanssen (like it sort of looks like from the top down view), but he of all people needs to be a lot more careful of where his elbows, and head, an stick, and legs are, because of his history.
 

lexrageorge

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 31, 2007
18,174
I don't understand the criticism of the NHL here. Marchand elbowed the guy in the head. While I wouldn't call it a true intent to injure, throwing the elbow was reckless and unnecessary. And resulted in a player being injured. Marchand has been through this before, so that counts against him as well.

There is nothing illogical or "a joke" about the suspension. It was deserved. And it certainly wouldn't be described by anyone as "light" either.
 

wnyghost

New Member
Aug 8, 2010
149
Just watched the Marchand interview in Twitter. I will agree he showed some nerve answering the questions head on. I does sound like he understands the situation he put himself and the organization in.

We can only hope he puts that over the edge play in the past. He has worked too hard to reach such a high level of play and value. Fingers crossed.

Check out @NHLBruins’s Tweet:
 

kenneycb

Hates Goose Island Beer; Loves Backdoor Play
SoSH Member
Dec 2, 2006
16,143
Tuukka's refugee camp
I don't understand the criticism of the NHL here. Marchand elbowed the guy in the head. While I wouldn't call it a true intent to injure, throwing the elbow was reckless and unnecessary. And resulted in a player being injured. Marchand has been through this before, so that counts against him as well.

There is nothing illogical or "a joke" about the suspension. It was deserved. And it certainly wouldn't be described by anyone as "light" either.
If you could describe the actual logic was used to reach 5 games, I would be all ears. The DPS is a black box whose actions are rife with inconsistencies.

And for the record, I'm fine with 5 games. I would just love to know how they got there outside of throwing a dart and adjusting up and down based off various criteria.
 

joe dokes

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 18, 2005
30,503
If he wanted to move the needle a bit on his reputation, he should skip the ASG. It's also probably the right thing to do. He's going to be a sideshow. (I would not be against a rule that says that if you happen to be ineligible to play at ASG time, you dont play in the ASG).
 

reggiecleveland

sublime
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Mar 5, 2004
27,992
Saskatoon Canada
Quick thoughts

Lucky it isn't longer, multiple suspensions eyc

Interview was pretty good, but almost all he talked about was hurting his team. He should have returned to the injury risk.

I hope nobody here wanting fewer than three was arguing for a suspension in Gronk injury.
 

Papelbon's Poutine

Homeland Security
SoSH Member
Dec 4, 2005
19,615
Portsmouth, NH
If you could describe the actual logic was used to reach 5 games, I would be all ears. The DPS is a black box whose actions are rife with inconsistencies.

And for the record, I'm fine with 5 games. I would just love to know how they got there outside of throwing a dart and adjusting up and down based off various criteria.
Could it be as simple as that the player can’t appeal on less than 6? Not that that’s right or wrong, but simply ‘give him the max we don’t have to waste time listening to him about it’.

I only follow hockey tangentially, but I’m aware of his reputation and think five is certainly called for. That was a cheap blow and we’ve all seen what Savard has gone through. There’s no place for it, imo.
 

InstantKarmma

Boomer Sympathizer
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
If you could describe the actual logic was used to reach 5 games, I would be all ears. The DPS is a black box whose actions are rife with inconsistencies.

And for the record, I'm fine with 5 games. I would just love to know how they got there outside of throwing a dart and adjusting up and down based off various criteria.
Similar to the logic the DPS used when Neal got 5 games for kneeing Marchand in the head. At the time, Neal wasn't a "repeat offender" as defined in the CBA, but he had a history.
 

joe dokes

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 18, 2005
30,503
Could it be as simple as that the player can’t appeal on less than 6? Not that that’s right or wrong, but simply ‘give him the max we don’t have to waste time listening to him about it’.

I only follow hockey tangentially, but I’m aware of his reputation and think five is certainly called for. That was a cheap blow and we’ve all seen what Savard has gone through. There’s no place for it, imo.
Sounds right as to the rationale. It was in some sense a maximum penalty for yet another incident. Next time he'll have appeal rights, because he's going to get more than 5.