Orpik suspended 3 games

Forum for Pittsburgh Penguins-related messages.

Moderators: Three Stars, dagny, pfim, netwolf

Orpik suspended 3 games

Postby Reilly on Mon Mar 06, 2006 6:36 pm

Reilly
 

Re: Orpik suspended 3 games

Postby NIN on Mon Mar 06, 2006 6:39 pm

Reilly wrote:www.sportsnet.ca


I don't have a problem with that. Like I've posted elsewhere I think the NHL image has to be considered when issueing out suspensions. They can't give Cole 2-minutes for Head Down let alone games. 3 games is about right, I guessed 2.
NIN
 

Postby netwolf on Mon Mar 06, 2006 7:29 pm

I think the league got this one right. Good explanation by Campbell:

"While it is apparent that there was no deliberate intent to injure on this play, Mr. Orpik's careless hit on his opponent resulted in a serious injury," said NHL Executive Vice President and Director of Hockey Operations Colin Campbell. "Even if a player leaves himself vulnerable, the checking player does bear some responsibility in avoiding a hit on a defenseless opponent."
netwolf
NHL Fourth Liner
NHL Fourth Liner
 
Posts: 15,388
Joined: Sat Jan 28, 2006 2:04 am

Postby NIN on Mon Mar 06, 2006 8:49 pm

everyone on OLN concurs with what the sensible posters here have concluded. Nothing Orpik could have done and Cole did it to himself.
NIN
 

Postby netwolf on Tue Mar 07, 2006 12:53 am

NIN wrote:everyone on OLN concurs with what the sensible posters here have concluded. Nothing Orpik could have done and Cole did it to himself.


And people accuse me of post-padding? I've never posted the exact same thing in two different threads. :wink:
netwolf
NHL Fourth Liner
NHL Fourth Liner
 
Posts: 15,388
Joined: Sat Jan 28, 2006 2:04 am

Postby NIN on Tue Mar 07, 2006 2:31 am

netwolf wrote:
NIN wrote:everyone on OLN concurs with what the sensible posters here have concluded. Nothing Orpik could have done and Cole did it to himself.


And people accuse me of post-padding? I've never posted the exact same thing in two different threads. :wink:


Check your mirrors Netwolf, I have the inside track!!

MUAHhahahahahaha MUAHHAHAhahahahahaa
NIN
 

Postby netwolf on Tue Mar 07, 2006 12:53 pm

NIN wrote:Check your mirrors Netwolf, I have the inside track!!

MUAHhahahahahaha MUAHHAHAhahahahahaa


At least you don't deny it. :wink:
netwolf
NHL Fourth Liner
NHL Fourth Liner
 
Posts: 15,388
Joined: Sat Jan 28, 2006 2:04 am

Postby bse on Tue Mar 07, 2006 3:12 pm

Orpik once again proves that he just might be one of the dumbest players around.

"You never try to injure someone," Orpik said. "You hit guys to hurt guys. You don't hit guys to injure guys. It sounds kind of funny but it's a lot different." (from Penguinslive.com)

Brooks, you do not hit to hurt anybody. You do not play to hurt anybody. This is just utterly ridiculous. Even peewees know that you hit people to get the puck or let your team get it or you hit to prevent opposing team from getting the puck. That's what it's all about, not going after people trying to hurt them for no reason. Interestingly, Brooks is one of those "bluecollar Americans" who dislike players who wear visors, because "they are not tough" and calls for "respect" - yet seems to lack the respect for opponent if all he's after is hurting opposing players. Perhaps he should just concentrate on playing ice hockey for a while.
bse
ECHL'er
ECHL'er
 
Posts: 675
Joined: Sat Jan 28, 2006 10:43 am
Location: Finland

Postby Draftnik on Tue Mar 07, 2006 3:21 pm

bse wrote:Interestingly, Brooks is one of those "bluecollar Americans" who dislike players who wear visors, because "they are not tough" and calls for "respect" - yet seems to lack the respect for opponent if all he's after is hurting opposing players. Perhaps he should just concentrate on playing ice hockey for a while.


Don't use this as a soapbox to insult Americans. Ruutu the flying Finn was just as vicious if not more against Jagr in the Olympics. Orpik wore a full face shield in college when it was mandated by the NCAA. This has nothing to do with visors. The NHLPA is the reason they are optional in the NHL.

Orpik made a mistake and he should be punished. If you watch the replay the puck goes to the left yet Cole turns a bit to the right at the last second. I don't know if he caught his skate in a rut, but ordinarily Orpik should have been bearing down on Cole's left shoulder if he turned to follow the puck. I'm not excusing Orpik and I think he got off light on the suspension, but he is not the filthy gutless cheap shot artist Ruutu is. Nationality has nothing to do with this.
Draftnik
NHL Fourth Liner
NHL Fourth Liner
 
Posts: 16,011
Joined: Sun Jan 29, 2006 1:52 pm
Location: Peters Twp.

Postby bse on Tue Mar 07, 2006 3:36 pm

Draftnik you didn't seem understand much from my previous post. First, nationality had nothing to do with this. Second, I didn't speak of his hit on Cole nor did I mention visors being reason for the hit or whatever. Never did I mention Ruutu or speak of this from a nationalistic viewpoint. It was all your invention. Never did I say anything about visors having to be mandatory. Quite the contrary, I think they should remain optional - however I can not understand those players who don't wear visors, accusing and blackmailing other players who are protecting their eyes.

I simply quoted Brooks Orpik and he basically stated that he hits to hurt people. Do you think any intelligent player would make such remarks? do you think anyone with an ounce of intelligence would hit just to hurt opponents for the sake of it?

I also mentiond that Orpik is one of those old fashioned "blue collar" guys who think that when you wear a visor, you are soft and that you command respect for playing without a visor in his eyes. In that respect, I think we can however agree, that players who have that kind of point of view, are North Americans atleast in origin. Why I mentioned the part about respect, is because Orpik lacks any respect for the opponent if he's true to his word and hits to hurt people.
bse
ECHL'er
ECHL'er
 
Posts: 675
Joined: Sat Jan 28, 2006 10:43 am
Location: Finland

Postby Draftnik on Tue Mar 07, 2006 4:02 pm

bse wrote:Interestingly, Brooks is one of those "bluecollar Americans" who dislike players who wear visors, because "they are not tough" and calls for "respect" - yet seems to lack the respect for opponent if all he's after is hurting opposing players. Perhaps he should just concentrate on playing ice hockey for a while.


BSE. You introduced nationality into this thread. Your quote is above. Cole, by the way, is also American and is probably acknowledged based on this season as the preeminent American power forward with the decline of Tkachuk, Guerin, LeClair, etc. I've never read a quote from Orpik regarding visors, so I have no idea how you can say he dislikes players that wear one. I don't know if Cole was wearing a visor Saturday. I've seen him playing without visors before. I can't recall if I've even seen him wearing one. Either way that had nothing to do with the hit Saturday.

As far as Orpik's quote about hurting people but not injuring them, I understand the difference. If he hits somebody hard enough to hurt them it is a form of intimidation. IMO he means hurt in the sense of making them feel pain, not injuring them. It definitely is part of the culture of American sports like Football for example. In this case though hitting a player from behind in hockey is the ultimate gutless move. If Orpik's intention was to hurt Cole without injuring him on a hit from behind I can't condone that action.

IMO Orpik is a moron on the ice. He takes a ton of stupid penalties and makes bad decisions all the time. I don't think he is a malicious person, but neither you nor I know for sure. Based on his on ice play I would not be surprised if he says stupid things that end up not having his intended meaning. I heard he was a below average student at BC.

I agree Don Cherry and Canadian hockey have a thing about visors. It isn't a big deal in the USA.
Draftnik
NHL Fourth Liner
NHL Fourth Liner
 
Posts: 16,011
Joined: Sun Jan 29, 2006 1:52 pm
Location: Peters Twp.

Postby ExPatriatePen on Tue Mar 07, 2006 4:18 pm

Draftnik wrote:As far as Orpik's quote about hurting people but not injuring them, I understand the difference. If he hits somebody hard enough to hurt them it is a form of intimidation. IMO he means hurt in the sense of making them feel pain, not injuring them. .


I'm not aware of any sports played in Finland (or Europe in general for that matter) that are full contact besides Hockey. The point of physical intimitation in sports doesn't translate as well.

In Football, even with the 'brush-back pitch' or sliding to break up a double play in baseball, the threat of possible injury is used to gain an advantage.

In soccer, for the most part, it's discouraged.

That's why you'll see derogatory statements like "bluecollar americans" being used in a negative fashion like bse did.

It's almost pointless to argue. Regardless of bse protestations, it's very much a cultural thing ON THE PART of SOME european players and fans.
ExPatriatePen
NHL Fourth Liner
NHL Fourth Liner
 
Posts: 22,691
Joined: Sat Feb 04, 2006 3:57 pm
Location: Source, Destination, Protocol, Port, size, sequence number, check sum... Yep, that about covers it.

Postby bse on Tue Mar 07, 2006 5:00 pm

"Either way that had nothing to do with the hit Saturday. "

Like I said.

And while ExPatriatePen might have a point, Orpik still said he hits to hurt people. Not to injure, but hurt.

Regardless of your nationality or views on whatever, that's a dumb comment by Orpik.

Let me quote myself:

"Brooks, you do not hit to hurt anybody. You do not play to hurt anybody. This is just utterly ridiculous. Even peewees know that you hit people to get the puck or let your team get it or you hit to prevent opposing team from getting the puck. That's what it's all about, not going after people trying to hurt them for no reason."

It seems to me that some hockey basics have gone missing. That might explain Orpik's performance on the ice, too. Most of us thought he could be 1-2 D in Pittsburgh, but it didn't happen. The guy can hit, but is he hitting properly? is he giving too much emphasis on hitting instead of defensive play? has he forgotten why a player makes contact and finishes a hit? if his goal is to hurt people instead of gaining puck possession for him or his team, something has gone missing.
Last edited by bse on Tue Mar 07, 2006 5:07 pm, edited 1 time in total.
bse
ECHL'er
ECHL'er
 
Posts: 675
Joined: Sat Jan 28, 2006 10:43 am
Location: Finland

Postby ExPatriatePen on Tue Mar 07, 2006 5:06 pm

bse wrote:"Either way that had nothing to do with the hit Saturday. "

Like I said.

And while ExPatriatePen might have a point, Orpik still said he hits to hurt people. Not to injure, but hurt.

Regardless of your nationality or views on whatever, that's a dumb comment by Orpik.

Let me quote myself:

"Brooks, you do not hit to hurt anybody. You do not play to hurt anybody. This is just utterly ridiculous. Even peewees know that you hit people to get the puck or let your team get it or you hit to prevent opposing team from getting the puck. That's what it's all about, not going after people trying to hurt them for no reason."

It seems to me that some hockey basics have gone missing. That might explain Orpik's performance on the ice, too. Most of us thought he could be 1-2 D in Pittsburgh, but it didn't happen and likely won't. The guy can hit, but is he hitting properly? if his goal is to hurt people instead of gaining puck possession for him or his team, something has gone missing.


It was a stupid thing to say. You never admit that you're aiming to 'hurt' another player,IF by 'hurt' you mean injure.

However, just because it's a dumb thing to say publicly, it's naive to think that it's not part of the game, particularly in the NHL.

Players constantly use physical intimidation to knock other players 'off their game'

Sometimes it even escalates to the point of trying to knock a player out of the game (or series).

Rarely, does it escalate to trying to knoick a guy out for the season or end his career, nad I seriously doubt that Brooks meant that in his statement.
Last edited by ExPatriatePen on Tue Mar 07, 2006 5:10 pm, edited 1 time in total.
ExPatriatePen
NHL Fourth Liner
NHL Fourth Liner
 
Posts: 22,691
Joined: Sat Feb 04, 2006 3:57 pm
Location: Source, Destination, Protocol, Port, size, sequence number, check sum... Yep, that about covers it.

Postby Draftnik on Tue Mar 07, 2006 5:10 pm

bse wrote:"Brooks, you do not hit to hurt anybody. You do not play to hurt anybody. This is just utterly ridiculous. Even peewees know that you hit people to get the puck or let your team get it or you hit to prevent opposing team from getting the puck. That's what it's all about, not going after people trying to hurt them for no reason."

It seems to me that some hockey basics have gone missing. That might explain Orpik's performance on the ice, too. Most of us thought he could be 1-2 D in Pittsburgh, but it didn't happen and likely won't. The guy can hit, but is he hitting properly? if his goal is to hurt people instead of gaining puck possession for him or his team, something has gone missing.


BSE why do you think The Ice Princess Alexei Morozov failed miserably while in Pittsburgh? He was a scarred little girl that stayed on the perimeter and rarely ventured into prime scoring area so that he could avoid being hit. Do you think he avoided being hit so that the opposing team could not take the puck from him? No. He avoided being hit because it hurt. That is what hitting to "hurt" and intimidate is all about in hockey. It changes the way certain people play the game if they don't have the courage to take a hit to make a play.
Draftnik
NHL Fourth Liner
NHL Fourth Liner
 
Posts: 16,011
Joined: Sun Jan 29, 2006 1:52 pm
Location: Peters Twp.

Postby bse on Tue Mar 07, 2006 5:12 pm

ExPatriatePen wrote:Players constantly use physical intimidation to knock other players 'off their game'


Physical intimidation is fine, and happens all the time. That does not mean you hit players at will just for the sake of hurting them. You might regularly hit the same guy so he loses control of his game, but that doesn't mean you should try to hurt him (physically). Orpik implied that he hits to hurt opponents. That doesn't seem normal to me.

Draftnik, you always have a reason to hit. Against Morozov, it was effective to play tough on him. However, that is part of the game plan as is gaining puck possession by making a timed hit or preventing opposing players from getting the puck etc. There's something to gain in there and it's all in the basics and that's what Orpik fails to understand as witnessed by his comments about just hitting to hurt opponents. Players should always respect each other and that happens 99% of the time. How can a professional hockey player comment that he only hits to cause damage for opposing players? Hitting is part of the game, but hurting opposing players deliberately is not. If Orpik had any credibility and intelligence at all, he wouldn't make such comments.
Last edited by bse on Tue Mar 07, 2006 5:22 pm, edited 2 times in total.
bse
ECHL'er
ECHL'er
 
Posts: 675
Joined: Sat Jan 28, 2006 10:43 am
Location: Finland

Postby Draftnik on Tue Mar 07, 2006 5:19 pm

bse wrote:
ExPatriatePen wrote:Players constantly use physical intimidation to knock other players 'off their game'


Physical intimidation is fine, and happens all the time. That does not mean you hit players at will just for the sake of hurting them. You might regularly hit the same guy so he loses control of his game, but that doesn't mean you should try to hurt him (physically). Orpik implied that he hits to hurt opponents. That doesn't seem normal to me.


The rules explicitly give a player latitude to hit an opponent after they have released the puck. At that point it is impossible to take the puck from an opponent, but the hit delivers the message that pain will result if you hold the puck to make a play, so next time the opponent may rush the play in order to avoid being hit.

Orpik tried to draw the distinction between hurt and injure. I understand the difference he implied, you do not, so I guess you and I will agree to disagree on his intent.
Draftnik
NHL Fourth Liner
NHL Fourth Liner
 
Posts: 16,011
Joined: Sun Jan 29, 2006 1:52 pm
Location: Peters Twp.

heards Brooks' interview on the radio last night

Postby penny lane on Tue Mar 07, 2006 5:23 pm

bse wrote:Orpik once again proves that he just might be one of the dumbest players around.

"You never try to injure someone," Orpik said. "You hit guys to hurt guys. You don't hit guys to injure guys. It sounds kind of funny but it's a lot different." (from Penguinslive.com)

Brooks, you do not hit to hurt anybody. You do not play to hurt anybody. This is just utterly ridiculous. Even peewees know that you hit people to get the puck or let your team get it or you hit to prevent opposing team from getting the puck. That's what it's all about, not going after people trying to hurt them for no reason. Interestingly, Brooks is one of those "bluecollar Americans" who dislike players who wear visors, because "they are not tough" and calls for "respect" - yet seems to lack the respect for opponent if all he's after is hurting opposing players. Perhaps he should just concentrate on playing ice hockey for a while.


Hearing Brooks on the radio, I think he was trying to say that in hockey you are always trying to put your opponent at a disadvantage...hurt their cause. I really don't think he meant hurt, as in seek & destroy.

Now, if every team was made-up of defensemen who would promise not to smash opponents body into boards or use their stick to brush opponents teeth then we'd have a gentlemanly game of hockey...aka tennis. :D
penny lane
NHL Third Liner
NHL Third Liner
 
Posts: 28,693
Joined: Mon Jan 30, 2006 6:29 pm
Location: Have fun, kick butt!

Re: heards Brooks' interview on the radio last night

Postby ExPatriatePen on Tue Mar 07, 2006 5:59 pm

penny lane wrote:
Now, if every team was made-up of defensemen who would promise not to smash opponents body into boards or use their stick to brush opponents teeth then we'd have a gentlemanly game of hockey...aka tennis. :D


Don't tell John McEnroe. :-)

Geeze the agreement you spell out makes one think of this years Pens (Until orpiks hit anyway) :-)
ExPatriatePen
NHL Fourth Liner
NHL Fourth Liner
 
Posts: 22,691
Joined: Sat Feb 04, 2006 3:57 pm
Location: Source, Destination, Protocol, Port, size, sequence number, check sum... Yep, that about covers it.

Postby BU Terriers on Tue Mar 07, 2006 6:31 pm

BSE you either are just trying to stir the pot or a bandy player at heart. Anyone that has played contact sports, hockey, football (us style) knows you hit "to hurt", drive through your opponent.There is a distinct difference between hurting and injuring and I'm sure you know it.If you don't then you have never played a contact sport. Pee Wee is where it starts here (USA Hockey), even Pee Wee's know you hit hard and drive through your opponent. Not to injure him, but "hurt" him, make him feel it. Just as Draftnik said intimidation is a factor in the way a lot of people play this game. "Soft" guys don't usually last long because they "hear foot steps" and get rid of the puck. Ever hear the expression "take a hit to make the play"?Guys that won't get weeded out sooner or later.
I'm sure Brooks meant to hit Cole to make him feel it, did he intend to hurt him, I doubt it.Where did Brooks ever say he disrespected anyone wearing a visor? Not all that long ago he was wearing a full shield in the NCAA. Stop putting words in people mouths, he plays along side many guys wearing 1/2 shields on the Pens on a daily basis.True North American Hockey and Football are two different games than their European versions. Don't try and tell us how the game is suppose to be played in the NHL here in North America. The European players that come over here to play either adapt to the NHL style or they fail and go back home. I'm sure the same is true for NA guys heading to Europe to play.
For all the years I played it hurt when I got checked, sometimes more than others depending on who was doing the hitting. I would not be watching the NHL if the players said "excuse me" before they checked
their opponents. I'll be real disappointed if Brooks changes his style because of the unfortunate "accident". Yes I feel Cole must bear some of the burden for his injury.
BU Terriers
 

Postby netwolf on Tue Mar 07, 2006 6:38 pm

BU Terriers wrote:BSE you either are just trying to stir the pot or a bandy player at heart. Anyone that has played contact sports, hockey, football (us style) knows you hit "to hurt", drive through your opponent.There is a distinct difference between hurting and injuring and I'm sure you know it.If you don't then you have never played a contact sport. Pee Wee is where it starts here (USA Hockey), even Pee Wee's know you hit hard and drive through your opponent. Not to injure him, but "hurt" him, make him feel it. Just as Draftnik said intimidation is a factor in the way a lot of people play this game. "Soft" guys don't usually last long because they "hear foot steps" and get rid of the puck. Ever hear the expression "take a hit to make the play"?Guys that won't get weeded out sooner or later.
I'm sure Brooks meant to hit Cole to make him feel it, did he intend to hurt him, I doubt it.Where did Brooks ever say he disrespected anyone wearing a visor? Not all that long ago he was wearing a full shield in the NCAA. Stop putting words in people mouths, he plays along side many guys wearing 1/2 shields on the Pens on a daily basis.True North American Hockey and Football are two different games than their European versions. Don't try and tell us how the game is suppose to be played in the NHL here in North America. The European players that come over here to play either adapt to the NHL style or they fail and go back home. I'm sure the same is true for NA guys heading to Europe to play.
For all the years I played it hurt when I got checked, sometimes more than others depending on who was doing the hitting. I would not be watching the NHL if the players said "excuse me" before they checked
their opponents. I'll be real disappointed if Brooks changes his style because of the unfortunate "accident". Yes I feel Cole must bear some of the burden for his injury.


A BU guy/girl defending a BC player? Orpik must really be innocent on this one! :D
netwolf
NHL Fourth Liner
NHL Fourth Liner
 
Posts: 15,388
Joined: Sat Jan 28, 2006 2:04 am

Postby BU Terriers on Tue Mar 07, 2006 7:06 pm

Draftnik wrote:
bse wrote:Interestingly, Brooks is one of those "bluecollar Americans" who dislike players who wear visors, because "they are not tough" and calls for "respect" - yet seems to lack the respect for opponent if all he's after is hurting opposing players. Perhaps he should just concentrate on playing ice hockey for a while.


BSE. You introduced nationality into this thread. Your quote is above. Cole, by the way, is also American and is probably acknowledged based on this season as the preeminent American power forward with the decline of Tkachuk, Guerin, LeClair, etc. I've never read a quote from Orpik regarding visors, so I have no idea how you can say he dislikes players that wear one. I don't know if Cole was wearing a visor Saturday. I've seen him playing without visors before. I can't recall if I've even seen him wearing one. Either way that had nothing to do with the hit Saturday.

As far as Orpik's quote about hurting people but not injuring them, I understand the difference. If he hits somebody hard enough to hurt them it is a form of intimidation. IMO he means hurt in the sense of making them feel pain, not injuring them. It definitely is part of the culture of American sports like Football for example. In this case though hitting a player from behind in hockey is the ultimate gutless move. If Orpik's intention was to hurt Cole without injuring him on a hit from behind I can't condone that action.

IMO Orpik is a moron on the ice. He takes a ton of stupid penalties and makes bad decisions all the time. I don't think he is a malicious person, but neither you nor I know for sure. Based on his on ice play I would not be surprised if he says stupid things that end up not having his intended meaning. I heard he was a below average student at BC.

I agree Don Cherry and Canadian hockey have a thing about visors. It isn't a big deal in the USA.


How did you find out about his grades at BC ? I thought there were laws against that.Kind of a cheap shot isn't it, " I heard" !Just as you don't know if he is a malious person you probably in fact know less about his career at BC. Your low opinion of him is stated quite plainly above, but "I heard", not consistent with most of your postings here.
BU Terriers
 

Postby Draftnik on Wed Mar 08, 2006 10:57 am

BU Terriers wrote:How did you find out about his grades at BC ? I thought there were laws against that.Kind of a cheap shot isn't it, " I heard" !Just as you don't know if he is a malious person you probably in fact know less about his career at BC. Your low opinion of him is stated quite plainly above, but "I heard", not consistent with most of your postings here.


I knew people working for the Pens at the time he was at BC that relayed that information to me. I assume they got the info from him which would not make it any type of privacy violation.

I don't think it is a cheap shot. As long as he plays well on the ice I really don't care if he offends people from Finland with his statements to the press. I don't think he would be a better hockey player if he were more articulate.
Draftnik
NHL Fourth Liner
NHL Fourth Liner
 
Posts: 16,011
Joined: Sun Jan 29, 2006 1:52 pm
Location: Peters Twp.


Return to Pittsburgh Penguins

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Humperdink, longtimefan, PAPLine and 15 guests


e-mail