Getty Images"The risk these players are willing to take game after game, shift after shift is worthy of adulation." — Larry Brooks, NY Post, May 7
"They're hot at blocking shots. We might be able to hurt a few guys [by] hitting one-timers in the foot and their head or something." — Marty Brodeur via Larry Brooks, May 16
Shot blocking in the NHL has its perils. Sure, the overly padded players of today can lay out their bodies with reckless abandon, turning aside point blasts from opponents and then quickly transitioning to offense. But there are less protected areas: Like the foot, as James van Riemsdyk will tell you; like the face, as Daniel Paille will tell you.
As Larry Brooks wrote last week, these brave New York Rangers that are throwing their bodies in front of pucks to the tune of 19 blocked shots per game are worthy of our adulation, but are also taking an inherent risk. Like, for example, an opponent blasting a puck off their noggin or feet as they're in a prone position.
That Brodeur wouldn't suggest this could happen … my goodness, clutch the pearls, NY Post! It's like the Queen of Hearts declared "Off with their heads!" From Brooks:
Even worse, there were Devils yesterday who actually seemed willing to debate whether this different kind of headhunting might be a legitimate tactic to discourage shot-blocking, though none would suggest it ever could be or ever would be adopted by New Jersey's team.
Still, the seed has been planted. When a pitcher who muses about brushing someone back nails a batter in the head, the presumption of innocence has been forfeited, the purpose having been advertised. What now would be the response from the Rangers, forget for the moment from the NHL, if a shot off a Devil's stick went awry, as in right into the face a Blueshirts defender?
First off, Brooks rightly points out that Marty's a bit of a hypocrite here. In 2003, Brodeur accused defenseman Pavel Kubina of the Tampa Bay Lightning of intentionally shooting at the head of Scott Stevens. Now, he appears to advocate for the same thing. Even in jest.
Let's not pretend that this doesn't happen already — that when a player has had his shot blocked four or five times in a game, he doesn't put a little extra mustard on the sixth attempt with an opponent sliding in front of him. Because he does.
[Jay Hart: Los Angeles Kings seem destined to reach Stanley Cup finals]
But essentially what Brooks is arguing here is that onus is on the shooter, rather than the player hurling himself into the line of fire to deflect a speeding piece of frozen rubber, when it comes to player safety. So much for adulation for risk -- like other facets of player safety, apparently the players putting himself in harm's way must be protected at all costs.
Worry not about the Rangers. The Devils told the NY Post on Tuesday that they aren't planning to intentionally injure them with shots to the face.
Read More »
