Torres suspended rest of round 2

[Stay Golden]

Torres is a puke but this is a reputation suspension. I don't agree with it all. I saw nothing really wrong with the hit. It wasn't charging, elbowing it wasn't a hit directly to the head. He hits him in the arm shoulder area and Stoll seems to get whiplashed from the hit more than anything.
Also how can the NHL play down that Stoll was moving around with his head leaning down looking for the puck. Then goes upright just as the hit is laid out.

[Teroy]

Was not a penalty. Torres was jobbed. The suspension is B.S.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xAzhWc35NWI

[Cleveland Steam Whistle]

Originally Posted by Teroy

Was not a penalty. Torres was jobbed. The suspension is B.S.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xAzhWc35NWI

Who cares if he did get jobbed, its Torres. Making Torres think every time he throws a hit for the rest of his career is a good thing because he's proven in the past he has bad judgement (or he doesn't care) and shouldn't get the benefit of the doubt.

[Peanut]

I think somebody could get killed out there and some of you guys would still be on here arguing that it was still a legal hit.

[Erick Estrada]

It's not the dirtiest hit ever but it's typical Torres predator style in that he comes from an angle where he's not easily detected, coils his legs and uncoils into the shoulder/head area of Stoll. Stoll doesn't even have the puck as he's just reaching out in a vulnerable position. My question is that the puck was loose in the offensive zone and rather than target a defenceless player why not go for the puck and try and turn it into a scoring opportunity for the team? It's obvious that his only intention on that play was to level Stoll regardless of where the puck was. IMO that's not hockey and I'm glad he's getting punished again.

[theinfinitejar]

Anyone saying this hit is legal is out to lunch, league did Torres a favor by letting him come back after the series (next year or next round) rather than just giving him 6 like they should have.

[Yamer]

Originally Posted by Peanut

I think somebody could get killed out there and some of you guys would still be on here arguing that it was still a legal hit.

Probably because it's not out of the realm of possibility that someone could receive a legal check and die from it.

[GirlySports]

I agree with the suspension and wish the NHL had more balls to give a proper explanation.

Torres always takes predatory lines and hits to injure.

(Ir)regardless of whether it was a hit to the head or not, it was an intent to injure with no attention to the puck. Similar to Gryba, the puck is right there as the player is reaching for it.. just nuzzle him off to the side and take the puck and counter-attack. There is no reason to hit the player to injure and let the puck go. Hope these suspension take these kind of hits out of the game.

There's always the argument "he's getting suspended because he's Torres, another player wouldn't be suspended".

That is true, another player wouldn't be stupid enough to take such a line, they would take the puck.

[JiriHrdina]

No tolerance on head shots is the only way to go. Good suspension

[zamler]

Agreed, would have liked to see an even longer suspension.

[You Need a Thneed]

Hit looks clean to me.

[Northendzone]

Look like a shot to the head to me......it was inevitable that raffi would get suspended at some point during the playoffs......

[Roof-Daddy]

I kind of hope the Flames sign Torres this off season, it would be worth it just for the reaction it would get on this site haha.

Won't happen though. He's north of 30 and has the hockey sense of a bag of marbles.

[Handsome B. Wonderful]

Just suspend him indefinitely and solve the Torres problem.

[driveway]

I agree exactly with Shannahan's analysis on the NHL.com video. 1. Principal contact to the head. 2. Causes injury 3. Repeat offender.

Likely this would have been a 10+ game suspension in the regular season. Given the 1=2 ratio of playoff to regular season games when determining suspensions, the rest of the second round seems perfectly reasonable.

Correct call, good suspension.

[Ped]

There will always be dissenters but imo if the league is moving toward the state where someone is suspended for a hit that may be legal in every other respect but the head ends up being the principle point of contact, then good.

Everyone complaining about the league turning wimpy or into a no hit league is forgetting all the players who have had their lives affected by hits to the head.

Just because something was okay a few years ago doesn't mean it has to be okay forever.

Getting rid of headshots and enforcers that hit each other in the head isn't going to happen overnight. And if we end up having less hits per game because of players wanting to avoid headshots, then that is the trade off for having less players who can't lead normal lives for having concussions.

Not much of an argument.

[Resolute 14]

Originally Posted by diane_phaneuf

no if it was 6 games I would think it was fine

it's the range, dependent on other things (i.e the series going 4-7 games)

Ok, that's just a bizarre argument. You are saying that if the NHL suspended Torres for the maximum in this scenario, the PA would be fine, but the fact that the league has allowed for the possibility of it being shorter would upset the union?

[Buff]

I'm on the fence on this one. The hit could have gone either way, and Torres wasn't targeting the head, the head was just hit as a part of the way the play went.

Reporter: Mr. Shanahan, can you share some info as to why Raffi Torres was suspended?

Shanahan: We are trying to enforce player safety by eliminating wreckless hits that target the head.

Reporter: Did you even see video of the hit?

Shanahan: It was Raffi Torres, who needs to see the video?

Although, I'm pretty sure it was more of a scenario where this hit may have been close to being good but the players head was still hit, and Torres is a repeat offender. So the NHL and Brendan Shanahan decided to err on the side of caution and suspend Torres. Send a message to Torres that he has to work harder to keep his nose clean. It is too bad for Torres that he has such a history because his game is played on the edge, and now he could potentially lose that edge if he needs to be more carefully with how he plays. This could affect his career. Better his career ends because he can't be effective the way he knows how than somebody else's career ends because they received a dangerous hit from Torres.

[d_phaneuf]

http://sharks.nhl.com/club/news.htm?id=671163&navid=TW

Comparing the facts of this incident against the actual wording of Rule 48.1, it appears that the NHL has not only made an inappropriate application of this rule but is trying to make an example out of a player who is being judged on past events, one who has changed his game dramatically this season and taken only six minor penalties in 39 games.

We are proud of the work Raffi has put in to successfully adjust his game. Although it's unfortunate that Jarret was injured on the play, we feel this decision is grossly unfair to the Raffi, his teammates and our fans. However, Raffi does not want to be a distraction to his teammates and has decided not to appeal this suspension and we respect that decision.

[d_phaneuf]

Originally Posted by Resolute 14

Ok, that's just a bizarre argument. You are saying that if the NHL suspended Torres for the maximum in this scenario, the PA would be fine, but the fact that the league has allowed for the possibility of it being shorter would upset the union?

I think it's bizarre for a suspension to be dependent on outside variables and not just on the event itself

if a suspension is worth 5 games let it be 5 games, 1 let it be 1 etc.