Merrick

@jammer2 Haha…I totally didn’t think that you did! I agree that he wouldn’t be a good fit for the Flyers, and that someone will end up overpaying for him. It’ll be interesting to see how he produces with whatever team he ends up with—and if he can maintain his scoring touch without the benefit of being Tavares’ linemate…

Meltzer addressed the possibility of adding Parenteau in his blog today: "Most folks seem to be focused on free agents such as P.A. Parenteau or Ray Whitney (himself 40 years old) if Jagr does not come back and the club is unable to trade for Ryan. I understand the sentiment -- there is a concern over the Flyers losing too much offense from the top two wings between Jagr and JVR departing. I view it a little differently. First of all, I'm not particularly enamored of Parenteau. The late-blooming winger has done a pretty good job on the Islanders' top line the last couple of years and has had some success against the Flyers (which sometimes contributes to a particular player being brought in) despite New York's poor record against Philly. Parenteau is a good passer with good offensive instincts. But he is a poor skater, subpar defensively and not much of a finisher. At age 29, he is not suddenly going to morph into a more complete player. Frankly, I think he's going to get overpaid by his next team and I would not be eager if I were Paul Holmgren to lock myself into a multi-year deal. Jagr might cost more for next season, but it will be only a one-year arrangement. As for Whitney or a discount option such as bringing Mike Knuble back to Philly at a reduced cost after a miserable season for the Capitals, they team also might as well just hammer out something with Jagr." http://www.hockeybuzz.com/blog/Bill-Meltzer/Meltzers-Musings-Jagr-Alternatives-Carle--LTIR-Larsson/45/45263

I'd love to see the Flyers sign him and them package him in a deal for Bobby Ryan. That'd be rich.

No Decision on Neal Right winger James Neal had hearings with Brendan Shanahan, who handles supplemental discipline for the NHL, for two separate incidents in Game 3 of the Penguins' first-round playoff series with Philadelphia. He said after practice, though, that he has not heard what punishment, if any, he will receive and that he does not expect any word until later this afternoon. http://plus.sites.post-gazette.com/index.php/pro-sports/penguins-plus/115935-no-decision-on-neal

I totally hear ya on this, but I still feel like I'm being imposed upon in some way. Should I be worried that someone's going to start an anti-alcohol campaign and force me to look at cirrhosis of the liver pics? I also don't think that the ads are appropriate for the hockey-viewing audience. There are probably a lot of real young kids out there—that is, too young to even understand the anti-smoking message—who have been terrified by those commericals. If I would've seen that stuff when I was five or six years old, I would've had nightmares for weeks. You're absoultely right about the ASPCA commercials—they're the worst!

Springfield High School (Delaware County), 1993

Does anybody else have a problem with these ridiculously over-the-top ads? Frankly, I resent the fact that I'm forced to sit through them during games that air on the NBC networks. First of all, they're too graphic. Definitely not the kind of stuff that you want to see (and hear) when you're sitting in front of the TV with a beer and a plate of nachos. Second, I'm not even a smoker. This is probably what annoys me the most—I'm being preached to about a problem that I don't even have. I guess I could simply change the channel when these ads come on. At the same time, I shouldn't need to be ready to go all Quick Draw McGraw with my remote every time a game cuts to commercial. I understand that smoking/cancer is bad, and that these ads are designed to shock people into seeing that. But watching hockey is an escape for me, and I just don't think I need to look at this sort of nonsense when I'm trying to unwind and enjoy myself.

@SpikeDDS I was just listening to some NHL talk on XM, and a really interesting point was made that suggested James Wisniewski should be the person who is most upset over the paltry fine that Weber received for his actions. It made a lot of sense. Even though Wisniewski was suspended for an elbow, both his and Weber’s acts showed a flagrant disregard for their opponent’s well-being. The difference is that Wisniewski served eight regular season games and forfeited $536,000 in salary. By the time that poor SOB finished serving his suspension, his team was already a long shot to make the playoffs. Meanwhile, Weber commits a crime that is just as offensive (if not more so), and isn’t even forced to sit one (palyoff) game for it. I’m sure he was feeling pressure from the league to go easy on Weber, but Shanahan still blew it on this one.

@B21 Haha…Are you trying to tell me that 96.1’s Morning Freak Show doesn’t accurately reflect the feelings of all Pittsburghians?!? I’m shocked! And I hope you’re not suggesting that The Biebs’ opinion on these matters wouldn’t carry any weight—The dude’s a confirmed rink rat...

@B21 I hear what you’re saying regarding Laviolette, Milbury, Roenick, et al. Regardless of their actions, there are many that perceive Campbell’s answer to the question as an apology, whether their Flyers fans, Penguins fans, or simply hockey fans in general. I’ve seen it used in numerous outlets, and, as I mentioned earlier, a Pittsburgh radio station used the term in “NHL Apologizes for Missing Call Against Pens in Game 1 Vs. Flyers” (http://www.961kiss.com/pages/freakshow.html?article=10037207). It seems to me that use of the term “apologize” isn’t limited to those caught up in the wave of anti-Penguins sentiment. Again, I don’t think Meltzer was killing Campbell for apologizing (even though he never apologized). He just acknowledged that Campbell addressed the play, said he was fine with it, and went on to note that missed calls eventually even out. If anything, he came across as a bit bitter about never receiving an explanation about what happened with the Islanders back in the day.

@B21 I agree that the term “official apology” was false. What’s interesting, though, is how many people—whether they’re Flyers fans or not—have interpreted it as an apology. Meltzer’s certainly not the only one using the term. Regardless of the “official apology” thing, I just think he’s saying that the league isn’t always consistent when explaining its mistakes. If you’re going to admit to one or two of them, you should admit to all of them. I think a weekly “blown calls” report on NHL.com would do the trick…

@B21 I think you’re getting too caught up in the “official apology” wording. While I admit that there was nothing official about it, Campbell came across as apologetic in the interview. It’s not like Meltzer is the only person who sees it that way—if you google “Campbell” and “apologize,” you get hits like “Colin Campbell Apologizes” “And NHL Senior Executive Vice President of Hockey Operations Colin Campbell is apologizing for it. ‘There's no other way to explain it but a missed call,’ Campbell told the Canadian Press. ‘We're as upset as Pittsburgh almost. It's a mistake.’ “NHL Apologizes for Missing Call Against Pens in Game 1 Vs. Flyers” (from 96.1 KISS—a Pittsburgh station) Regardless of whether the apology was “official” (and if it was even an apology), Meltzer said he had no problem with it. I got the impression that he was more upset about the lack of an explanation from the league for what happened between the Flyers and the Islanders many moons ago. He didn’t seem too up-in-arms to me. As a matter of fact, I thought he was simply stating that bad calls—no matter which way they go—have a way of eventually evening out.

@Southwestflyer Meltzer had a pretty good blurb regarding this at the bottom of his blog this morning. I think it's spot-on: The NHL's Colin Campbell officially apologized to the Penguins for the obvious blown offside call that led to Briere's first goal of the game. No. I have problems with that. I have no problem with that. However, the Flyers are still awaiting their apology (or at least plausible explanation) for the first-period blown icing call. However, the Flyers are still awaiting their apology (or at least plausible explanation) for the blown first-period icing call. Oh and while the NHL is in apologetic mood, Philadelphia's wait for the League apology is now 22 years and Counting for the non-calls on Denis Potvin's blatantly high-sticked goal and even more blatant offside committed on Brent Sutter's goal in Game 6 of the 1980 Stanley Cup final. Oh and while the NHL is an apologetic mood, Philadelphia's wait for a league apology is now 22 years and counting for the non-calls on Denis Potvin's blatantly high-sticked goal and even more blatant offside committed on Brent Sutter's goal in Game 6 of the 1980 Stanley Cup Final. The Truth of the matter is that the non-calls in Game 1 ultimately evened out. The truth of the matter is that the non-calls in Game 1 ultimately evened out. Officials are human, too, and there are inevitably numerous other points within the game that Contribute to a Win or a loss. Officials are human, too, and there are inevitably numerous other points within the game that contribute to a win or a loss. http://www.hockeybuz...nguins/45/43793

@Podein25 I didn't see Simmonds' knee on Fleury, but I did notice Crosby's flagrant embellishment on that Jagr "interference" penalty. My feeling was that both teams got away with some pretty questionable plays last night. I'm just glad the Flyers came out on top!

@canoli The poster’s comment was so ridiculously over the top—something like, “*$@#$%! that baby! I’d throw it on the ice!” What cracked me up was the fact that it inspired an avalanche of condescending responses (e.g., “Until you’re a parent, you can never understand how horrible it would be to have your child thrown on the ice”). It still makes me laugh when I think about it.

@orange_crush Easy there, muscles—you’re gonna get people all riled up with that type of talk! Along those lines, nothing could top one of my favorite philly.com moments in which a member stated that, if he got a hold of it, he would throw Chris Kunitz’s newborn baby on the Wachovia Center ice during one of the Flyers/Pens playoff games. Even though the poster clearly wasn’t serious, it sparked a ton of responses of the it’s-not-cool-to-talk-about-throwing-people’s-babies-on-the-ice nature. Ah, good times…

I'm just hoping this article doesn't create some kind of awkward Kumbaya moment between Brooks and Torts...

Add Larry Brooks to the list, too. Apologies if this has already been posted... Don’t rip Penguins, or else As If there had been any previous doubt, this week’s events demonstrated once and for all the Penguins are the NHL’s version of Made Men, not only untouchable but protected by the authorities against insult. The league responded to John Tortorella’s withering verbal attack on the Pittsburgh organization, Sidney Crosby and Evgeni Malkin as if the Rangers coach had bellied up to the bar and told Mario Lemieux to go home and get his shine box. The NHL whacked Tortorella in the pocketbook is what they did, because if there’s one thing the league can’t allow, it’s calling attention to the Most Favored Nation status granted the Penguins and their owner. The irony is that’s exactly what the league accomplished by overreacting to Tortorella’s colorful verbiage with its $20,000 fine approximately 14 months after the NHL had allowed Lemieux to skate away free of charge after the owner issued a statement on his team’s website in which he condemned the league for its response to brawls between the Islanders and the Penguins at the Coliseum. Lemieux threatened to walk away from the NHL the way he once threatened to take his team to Kansas City. He said the league had failed. The league said it would take no action against the owner. The “arrogance” of the Pittsburgh ownership to which Tortorella referred is a sense of entitlement bestowed upon it by a league that appears more invested in protecting the Penguins than opponents who might be injured as a result of reckless plays that somehow always are deemed accidental or not worthy of NHL sanction. On its own, the Brooks Orpik knee-on-knee hit delivered to Derek Stepan in the final minutes of Thursday’s game in Pittsburgh probably was not worthy of a suspension. The fact is, however, it was not a stand-alone incident. Orpik initiated a similar, perhaps even more malicious, knee-on-knee hit against Brad Richards in the neutral zone midway through the first period of a game at the Garden on Nov. 29, a play in which neither a penalty was called nor supplemental discipline issued. Malkin is notorious for his slew-footing escapades on which he never is cited, all the way back to the 2008 playoffs against the Rangers. Matt Cooke got away with a leg sweep on Richards in the second period of a game at the Garden on Jan. 19. Aaron Asham injured the Bruins’ Johnny Boychuk leg-on-leg April 3, two days after another one of those “accidental” collisions against Philadelphia that just happen to follow the Penguins from city to city. Pierre McGuire, meanwhile, saw nothing. Better for the NBC’s between-the-glass future employment prospects in either the broadcast industry or in an NHL front office to remain silent rather than cast a critical glance at the Penguins, much less record anything other than an audio love letter their way. It always has been inexplicable NBC would have wanted Mike Milbury, someone whose idea of analysis is invariably to dive straight to the bottom and engage in character assassination and attack on an individual’s manhood, as its representative. But the network never one time flinched until this week, when Milbury had the audacity to defame Crosby, Malkin and the Penguins the way he has built a TV career defaming Jaromir Jagr, Alex Ovechkin, Daniel and Henrik Sedin ... uh, maybe there’s a pattern? The network, and by extension, the league, was fine with years of ridicule and personal attack over its own airwaves, but when Milbury dared to similarly bottom-feed on the Penguins and Crosby in a radio interview, no less, whoa boy, enough was enough. An apology was coerced and Milbury conveniently will not be among the participants in tomorrow’s joint network and league conference call (“Uh, Mike, did you mean it when you called Crosby a ‘punk’ before you recanted?”) designed to publicize the coverage of the playoffs. The 11th Commandment: “Thy shy not speak ill of the Favorite Son.” Everyone is on notice from the league. The problem for the league though, is everyone has noticed the double standard as applied to the Penguins by a league that was silent when Lemieux, coolly detached two days after an event, attacked the operation but reached into Tortorella’s pocket for $20,000 when the coach, white hot 20 minutes after an incident, did the same. As far as the smell test goes, the league has passed. It smells, all right. http://www.nypost.com/p/sports/more_sports/don_rip_pens_or_else_5hzTZmHXH99XRT5dVC4VZK

Shelly was in a pretty tough position. He wasn’t going to fight McIntyre just for the sake of a fight—McIntyre had nothing to do with what happened in the previous match. (Nor did Shelly, for that matter.) I think Shelly’s role was to act more as a deterrent than anything else. The way the refs were calling things on Sunday, he probably would’ve been tossed from the game if he’d dropped the gloves with McIntyre. Then the Pens would’ve been free to run amok for the rest of the game without even the threat of retribution. In terms of Harry Z: I wish he didn’t get pummeled, but sometimes that’s the way it goes. To Vitale’s credit, he answered the bell when Harry Z came calling. To the Flyers’ credit, they let the Vitale thing go after he fought Harry Z. I didn’t want it to turn into a Steve Moore/Todd Bertuzzi type of situation. Most people remember the end of that incident, with Moore suffering some fractured neck vertebrae at the hands of Bertuzzi in response for laying a cheap shot on Markus Naslund. But many also forget that Moore owned up to it by fighting Matt Cooke prior to being ambushed by Bertuzzi. With the playoffs looming, the Flyers did the smart thing in letting it go and finishing out an otherwise meaningless game without incurring any significant injuries.

It seems to me that Rinaldo has been getting the Steve Downie treatment all year—I'm starting to worry that this kid will never get a fair shake from the refs simply because of his reputation and the fact that he's wearing O&B. Yesterday's hit probably warrented two minutes, but the five and a game misconduct were a joke. I'd buy that the refs were trying to send a message and keep control of the game if yesterday's incident was an isolated one. But there have been several instances this season in which Rinaldo was penalized for loud and violent—but legal—checks. I'm hoping that he's just "paying his dues" with the refs this year, and that they'll realize in the future that many of his hits—no matter how brutal—are within the rules. He's a nice energy player, and I think he has a little more skill than many realize. I believe Jim Jackson said the other night that the coaching staff are thinking of expanding his role next season. The refs are clearly gonna have to him the benefit of the doubt in order for that to work.

I think it was becasue Jagr was already in the box for hooking. In this case, the goal let Jagr out of the box, but did not negate Bourdon's penalty.

http://espn.go.com/espn/commentary/story/_/page/wulf-120402/honor-cheapshots-aaron-rodgers-jeremy-lin-sidney-crosby This is why people who don't understand hockey shouldn't write about hockey. From about mid-way through the article: "So there was Sid, minding his own business while waiting for a video replay of a goal during the third period of the Penguins-Flyers game on April 1, when Schenn skates up behind him, and . It was a dumb, vicious sand-bagging that set off a series of skirmishes and led to the ejection of Flyers coach Peter Laviolette. But it was trumped by the commentary of one of the broadcast analysts, a former coach, who not only called the hit "part of the deal" but also praised Schenn as "a character kid" with "tremendous character." Really?"I know this has been discussed over and over, but I can't believe how much the media goes out of its way to portray Crosby as a hapless victim. Phrases that particularly disgusted me included "minding his own business" and "vicious sand-bagging."

From a recently posted Puck Daddy interview with Pavel Datsyuk: Did you see the Giroux penalty shot in a recent game? The one he named "The Datsyuk?" Yes, I saw it. It's very, very flattering. Thank him so much. It feels very good. I am very happy. No other words to describe it.This strikes me as a classy response from an extremely classy guy. Full interview here.

Hey Van…Totally agree with you in terms of the Kunitz nonsense. I’m surprised, though, that no one’s talking about Letang’s hit on Jagr. When I watched it, it looked like he left his feet to hit him. I haven’t seen it since, so I’d be willing to accept that the follow-through caused his skates to leave the ice (if that was indeed the case). In real time, though, I thought it looked like a charge. I was glad to see Rinaldo and Hartnell get right after him, even though the comedy of errors that followed left Rinaldo with a busted lip…

Crosby is apparently out for tomorrow's game and the next one against the Islanders for "precautionary reasons."