The Hockey News has released its archive to all THN subscribers: 76 years of history, stories, and features. Subscribe now to view the full THN Archives here [https://archive.thehockeynews.com/] Also, go to thn.com/free [http://thn.com/free] to subscribe. A Whistle Or A Pacifier? - Jan. 2, 2018 - Vol. 71, Issue 09 – Ken Campbell ALL RIGHT THEN, JUST so we have this straight, fewer than six months ago the guys who run the hockey departments in the NHL wanted the league to do something about faceoff cheats. They implored the league to use its existing rules to crack down on players who were using their star power to curry favor with linesmen, which allowed them to encroach on the faceoff circle and win the draw. So in September the league responded by doing just that, reviving an obscure rule that calls for a two-minute penalty after two faceoff infractions on the same draw. But then when the same GMs met in mid-November, they floated the idea that a two-minute penalty for a faceoff violation just might be “too punitive” and talked about the possibility of asking the league to reduce it to one minute. While at it, they brought up the possibility of lobbying for a one-minute penalty for shooting the puck over the glass and reducing minor penalties in 3-on-3 overtime to just one minute. Wow, that’s almost like carping about how high player salaries are and how they damage small-market teams, then spending the first couple of years after the league imposes a salary cap complaining about how difficult it is to keep your players and manage your payroll. Hey, wait a minute… It would be difficult to find a league that blunts skill and smarts in the name of leveling the playing field the way the NHL does. Can anyone rationally explain why teams are allowed to ice the puck with impunity when killing a penalty? When the Montreal Canadiens were running roughshod over their opponents with a lethal power play in the 1950s, the league imposed a rule limiting the number of goals scored on a power play to one. And we can’t have a team play 60-plus minutes and come away with nothing, which gave rise to the loser point. What makes this latest pondering by GMs so difficult to fathom is that it has nothing to do with the law of unintended consequences. If it did, well, then you might be able to understand their thinking. But when the GMs told their bosses to crack down on faceoffs, did they not envision it would result in penalties during crucial times in games and might even decide some of them? When they lobbied for 3-on-3 overtime to increase offense and reduce the number of shootouts, did they not ponder the possibility some games would be decided by 4-on-3 situations? Isn’t that the kind of thing they were trying to achieve in the first place? San Jose Sharks' Projected Lineup vs. New Jersey Devils - 2025/10/30 [https://deweb-519a7.b-cdn.net/post-images/6c02cd1d-c40e-4a87-a0ea-8bce2ec220c6.jpeg] San Jose Sharks' Projected Lineup vs. New Jersey Devils - 2025/10/30 The San Jose Sharks are back in action again tonight against the New Jersey Devils. This is their second game against the Devils in two weeks. [https://thehockeynews.com/nhl/san-jose-sharks/latest-news/san-jose-sharks-projected-lineup-vs-new-jersey-devils---2025-10-30] If these things had been foisted upon GMs – and in their defense the puck-overthe- glass penalty was – you might have a little sympathy for them. But the faceoff crackdown and 3-on-3 were moves not only endorsed by them, they were concocted and spearheaded by them. And now that they’re seeing the results, they want to pull back.With respect to faceoffs, it is having the desired effect. After some initial hiccups, we’re seeing players adapt to the new standard. Joe Thornton, who was one of the most prominent faceoff cheaters in the league, is still winning 55 percent of his draws. Kyle Turris, another player who was mentioned in that vein, is also at 55 percent. Players are adjusting and still winning on merit. IF A TEAM TAKES A PENALTY IN OVERTIME,IT SHOULD BE PREPARED TO SPEND 40 PERCENT OF THE EXTRA PERIOD KILLING A PENALTY Then there’s the notion of making some minor penalties worth less than others, which would send us down a slippery slope. Those in favor of doing this argue that inadvertently flipping the puck over the glass is less egregious of an infraction than elbowing your foe in the head. So where does it end? What do you do with too-many-men-on-theice where the puck hits a player’s skate as he’s headed to the bench? Mini-egregious, so maybe just a 45-second penalty? Here’s the way it works, or should work in hockey: you break the rules, either deliberately or by accident, and you’re subject to a minimum two-minute penalty. It’s not about severity, unless of course the action is so egregious or dangerous that it merits a five-minute major and game misconduct. When the league imposed the puck-overthe- glass penalty, it didn’t do so because it was delaying games or disrupting the flow. It did it to create more pressure on defensemen playing the puck in their own zone. If a guy knew all he had to do was ring it off the glass to get it out with no worries about whether or not it cleared the glass, that takes a lot of skill and poise out of the equation. The league was, and has been, steadfast in its intent on this. By not giving defensemen that option, it either forces them to be better at what they do or risk the consequences of trying to make an easy, lazy play. By the same token, if a team takes a penalty in OT, it should be prepared to spend 40 percent of the extra period killing a penalty. Overtime is supposed to be different than the first 60 minutes. You’re supposed to be trying to determine a winner, aren’t you? The ramifications for making a mistake in OT should be a lot more significant than those that are made during regulation. Each player in the NHL doesn’t get to hoist the Stanley Cup when the season ends. That’s not how it works. This is the highest level of competition in the world, featuring the best players in an environment where the standard of play is worlds above any other league. These guys wear big-boy hockey pants and they can handle two-minute penalties. San Jose Sharks Place Nick Leddy On IR [https://deweb-519a7.b-cdn.net/post-images/fcf349ab-b8bb-45ef-95d8-9c61a4f90831.jpeg] San Jose Sharks Place Nick Leddy On IR The San Jose Sharks have announced that they've placed defensemen Nick Leddy on the injury reverse. [https://thehockeynews.com/nhl/san-jose-sharks/latest-news/san-jose-sharks-place-nick-leddy-on-ir] From THN's Archive: All Hail Marleau [https://deweb-519a7.b-cdn.net/post-images/7572b9e1-08ba-47fa-bd01-d31935b088fb.jpeg] From THN's Archive: All Hail Marleau Debuting as the league’s youngest player, producing throughout his 30s and going 12-plus years without missing a game, Patrick Marleau rides the perfect storm to the games record. Will anyone ever top it? [https://thehockeynews.com/nhl/san-jose-sharks/latest-news/from-thn-s-archive-all-hail-marleau] From THN's Archive: The Will To Win [https://deweb-519a7.b-cdn.net/post-images/7a0c4623-5cd1-422f-b645-58cca27d1bc7.jpeg] From THN's Archive: The Will To Win The Hockey News has released its archive to all THN subscribers: 76 years of history, stories, and features. [https://thehockeynews.com/nhl/san-jose-sharks/latest-news/from-thn-s-archive-the-will-to-win] From THN's Archive: Top 100 21 and Under: 2 - Macklin Celebrini [https://deweb-519a7.b-cdn.net/post-images/6d323433-0907-461c-9d39-ca36dacad884.jpeg] From THN's Archive: Top 100 21 and Under: 2 - Macklin Celebrini Macklin Celebrini's electrifying NHL debut showcases the creativity and skill that made him the first overall pick. The Sharks' future looks bright. [https://thehockeynews.com/nhl/san-jose-sharks/latest-news/from-thn-s-archive-top-100-21-and-under-2---macklin-celebrini]
