User Rating: / 5
PoorBest 

Monday, 14 March 2011 18:56

Written by Seth Rorabaugh

ESPN's Pierre LeBrun has some amazing stuff today on a letter Mario Lemieux sent to NHL commissioner Gary Bettman. In the letter, Lemieux suggests the league punish teams as a deterrent to violent play.

From LeBrun, the text of the letter:

"On behalf of the Pittsburgh Penguins organization, I am writing to propose a discussion by the Board of Governors and general managers about the NHL's current system of supplementary discipline -- and how it affects not only the integrity but the perception of our great game.:

"The current system punishes the offending player but does very little to deter such actions in the future. We need to review, upgrade and more clearly define our policies in this regard, so that they can provide a meaningful deterrence and effectively clean up the game."

"While there have been 50-plus suspensions since the start of the 2009-10 season, the suspensions themselves don't seem to be deterring these illegal acts and tactics. And we've often seen repeat offenders. We think it is time that teams also are held accountable for the actions of their players. We propose instituting a policy of automatically fining a team when one if its players is suspended -- with the amount of the fine based on the length of the suspension. This should serve as a disincentive for teams as well as players to employ these kinds of tactics."

-Lemieux suggested the following level of fines based on player suspension:

• 1-2 games--$50,000 fine to team
• 3-4 games--$100,000 fine to team
• 5-8 games--$250,000 fine to team
• 9-10 games--$500,000 fine to team
• 11-15 games--$750,000 fine to team
• More than 15 games--$1 million fine to team

"If a player is a repeat offender during that season, the fine to the team would double. Please note that if this proposed system were in operation today, the Pittsburgh Penguins would have been fined $600,000 this season because of recent suspensions to two players. We all have to take responsibility if we are going to improve the game."

Update: An official with the Penguins declined comment regarding the letter.

Comments (6)

Subscribe to this comment's feed

...
written by JC65, March 14, 2011 - 08:11 PM

My suggestion is this: if a player is suspended the team cannot replace them on the roster. If one player is suspended the team can only dress 19 players. If two are suspended they're down to 18.

I'd date Gillies (or Cooke for that matter) to go act like an idiot with the prospect of actually hurting the team in the long-term on the table.

• 
• +2
• 
• 

...
written by JC65, March 14, 2011 - 08:11 PM

er... I'd dare Gillies. I'm not saying he's not a good looking man, but he's not my type.

• 
• +7
• 
• 

...
written by PensfaninLAexile, March 14, 2011 - 08:57 PM

Progress by Mario, but still too weak.

For most owners and teams these are still low amounts. If he is looking to impose real punishment it should include:

1) When a player is suspended, that player must be carried by their team for the duration of the suspension -- in other words, the team loses a roster spot during the suspension.

2) A player suspended would lose not only the games for the immediate suspension, but also the next two games against the opponent. In other words, the next two time the Isles play the Pens, Gillies would be suspended AND the Isles would lose a roster spot. As it is, the team hurt gets no remedy -- the Isles will be at full strength the next game.

Penalizing teams a roster spot and leaving them shorthanded the next time they face the 'injured' team, you start to punish them where it hurts -- in the win/loss column. Now, suspending goons means nothing -- since they hardly contribute to a team's ability to win.

• 
• +2
• 
• 

...
written by leahbackus, March 14, 2011 - 10:41 PM

I would add to the fines and lost roster spots that if another player is injured as a result of the suspended player's actions, that player should have to sit out the suspension plus any additional time the injured player is also off the ice. That would only work, though, if teams were fined for suspensions otherwise every basement-dwelling team would send out a low-paid goon to take out the superstars.

• 
• -1
• 
• 

...
written by Luiz Mello, March 15, 2011 - 11:13 AM

But he employs Matt Cooke!

• 
• +2
• 
• 

...
written by HockeyNut, March 15, 2011 - 12:24 PM

Luiz - Mario addressed this.
Pensfan - Say Gilles is traded to FLA tomorrow. Would he be forced to sit against the Pens the next 2 times FLA plays the Pens? BTW, I totally agree.

Here is my suggestion:
1. Fine teams as ML suggests.
2. Make the fine count against the salary cap. (Might be a CBA issue here, but a thought)
3. Player serves suspension and then continues to sit if the injured player has not returned to the ice yet.
4. The team is forced to carry the roster spot and sits the next 2 against the team.
5. If the player is traded, he sits the next the next 2 against the injured players team with the new team and the team the offender played for , loses that roster spot for the next 2 games against the injured players team.

• 
• +1
• 
•