Monday Morning Fly By: Boosh and OKT back, Phantoms kick off season

by Travis Hughes on Oct 5, 2009 6:01 AM EDT in Morning Fly By

Your daily dose of Philadelphia Flyers-related news and notes...

The Flyers are one of four 2-0 teams in the Eastern Conference. The others? Pittsburgh, Washington, and Montreal. Basically what you'd expect. Two of those teams are the Flyers next opponents. Nothing like early season tests, boys.
Johan Backlund and Marc-Andre Bourdon were both sent back to the Phantoms on Sunday, meaning Brian Boucher and Ole-Kristian Tollefsen are ready to join the lineup. Boucher will take his nice cozy seat on the end of the bench, and it looks like OKT will be the 7th defenseman for the time being.
With those minor moves, the Flyers currently sit 2.28 million under the salary cap. Nice little change, isn't it?
A trio of Inquirer columnists that probably have a collective hockey IQ of 12 decided to have a little discussion about the Flyers. The painful aftermath... [Inquirer]
Solid journalism elsewhere, however. CSN Philly's Tim Panaccio does a great job with his Sunday NHL Notebook each week, and yesterday was no different. [CSN Philly]
Yeah, this article is out of Pittsburgh, but it's another great piece of journalism. Take every thought you have when you first step into a hockey rink -- whether it be the Wachovia Center, the Skate Zone, or a pond in January -- and put it into words. That's what this article is. A stick tap to new commenter halx for the tip. [Pittsburgh Post-Gazette]
The Flyers are brimming with confidence as they prepare for their home opener tomorrow night. [Daily News]
A fan-favorite in Colorado, Ian Laperriere is beginning to show fans in Philadelphia why he was so popular. [Inquirer]
The Adirondack Phantoms dropped the first puck in their history on Saturday night in front of a standing room only crowd at the Glens Falls Civic Center. They lost to the Worcester Sharks on a last second goal, but that didn't seem to dampen the mood. Lots of coverage from the Post-Star on this one -- their coverage has been great. [blog, recap article, feature article, video]
Randy Jones was paired with both Kevin Marshall and Mike Ratchuk on Saturday. Andreas Nodl scored the first goal in Adirondack Phantoms history.
A vicious hit to the head of Nashville's J.P. Dumont on Saturday against Dallas. [Puck Daddy]
And finally, let's take an early peek at our opponent for tomorrow's home opener: the Capitals. They beat up on the Leafs on Saturday night, but it seems they laid a bit of an egg in the third period. Instead of winning 6-1, they won 6-4, and "there won't be nearly as much of a margin for error against the Flyers come Tuesday." [Japers' Rink]

Tweet Comment 8 comments | 0 recs |

Do you like this story?

Comments

That hit on J.P. Dumont was nasty. Feel bad for him since he was definitely in a prone position, but Robidas showed he was going for the body early, just couldn’t avoid it. I say unfortunate, hard, clean hit.

Broad Street Hockey -
Makin' it look mean since 1967.

by Geoff Detweiler on Oct 5, 2009 9:48 AM EDT reply actions

Geoff

Once again I have to disagree with you on this hit his feet left the ice as he made contact, just like the Phaneuf hit on Okposo in this preseason. Don’t give me that physics crap his feet left which increases the impact of the hit. Dumont did have his head down and deserved to get laid out but to you still can’t leave your feet to throw and check that is a penalty. Now the Phaneuf hit was deemed clean by the league, along with the Cooke and Kunitz hits on Kimmo last year therefore this hit is “clean” by NHL standards. I don’t like hits which make 1st contact to the head but that is what you get when practically outlaw the low bridging hip check which should be used more. A hip check is called that because you check the guys hip not a head shot like this. The low bridging hip check is dangerous when you go at a guys knee or when the skater tries to avoid the hip check by jumping over it. Either way the I still feel that the old school hip check is less dangerous than flying forearm head shots.

by chrislanci on Oct 5, 2009 12:14 PM EDT up reply actions

If you pause the video at 0:54, you will see that Robidas is on his skates at the time of impact. I took a screen shot of it, but am unable to post in this window unless the image is online – which sucks. Whether that matters to you or not, is a different topic. I certainly agree that hip checks are safer, and I definitely agree that when someone leads with their arm to the head, something needs to happen. Whether it be fine, suspension, or forced to fight afterwards is up for debate.

To me, this hit was officially clean, but speaks more to the current attitude held by the league and the players. Robidas clearly went for the big hit, rather than just the effective hit. That leads to injuries, and serious ones at that. I’m not sure what can be done, since it speaks more to the general disregard for opponents’ safety than for a disregard for the rules.

Broad Street Hockey -
Makin' it look mean since 1967.

by Geoff Detweiler on Oct 5, 2009 12:40 PM EDT up reply actions

With some help from the SBNation staff, I bring you my screen grab:

Broad Street Hockey -
Makin' it look mean since 1967.

by Geoff Detweiler on Oct 5, 2009 1:03 PM EDT up reply actions

nice shot

Yeah that is a nice pic he skates are on the ice but you get a clear shot of the forearm to the jaw. I would pop him a two game suspension or maybe a 10-20K fine with a clear explanation from Gary B.. It works in the NFL they review big hits just fine guys for dangerous plays regardless of intent, it keeps awareness up, without taking away the hitting. The NHL has created a monster by glorifying the Scott Stevens and Kasparitis kill shots of the past and I still feel the mandated visor makes things worse. It provides what is thought to be a safe target for the forearm / elbow. The NHLPA needs to get proactive on this and start protecting the players heads instead of just their wallets, it would be nice to see Eric Lindros working on this being a victim and all, I thought he was involved in the NHLPA is some fashion. Dumont if he saw he coming should have gotten his stick up right into Robidas teeth to protect himself, but of course he would have been call for a 4 minute double minor, stupid rule that is. High sticks are not nearly as dangerous as hits like this and will the under 5 minute instigator suspension rule also prevents any safe retribution from occurring. At the time of the hit nobody wants to jump him but at the end the game that is not close why the hell not go after him. Oh yeah you can’t. more concussions, high hits, and dirty play since that rule has been added for sure. In the old days Dave Brown would have gotten his number and dropped him at the 3 minute mark just to keep the game honest and help maintain the unwritten code of hockey NO HEAD HUNTING.

by chrislanci on Oct 5, 2009 2:14 PM EDT up reply actions

I agree with what you’re saying. The grab i got left out the fact that the ref, within 2 seconds of this shot covers his face so he doesn’t see the forearm to the head. Why be in that position if you aren’t going to look at the play? Second, at what point would you give a player a break in situations like this? I already explained that I think the problem here was the desire to go for the big check as opposed to just the effective check, but I’ve definitely seen worse head hunting and reckless plays (the Kunitz hit for example). I still think this play was just unfortunate – Robidas was in the crouched position, skates on the ice – since Dumont was trying to stop, was far lower to the ice, and just far enough away from the boards. I still don’t favor suspension, but the NFL comparison is good. Do something to deter players from making dangerous hits. Either fine a player or use discretion in the instigator rule. But then we have the problem Travis outlined: Who shows discretion; how do we distinguish between clean, dirty, questionable, and dangerous; when can you stand up for a teammate; and many others.

Broad Street Hockey -
Makin' it look mean since 1967.

by Geoff Detweiler on Oct 5, 2009 3:13 PM EDT up reply actions

Giving officials the power of discretion is a horrible idea. Rules are rules and should be as robotic and clear cut as possible. It completely failed when the used to call off icing on discretionary “pass attempt” and now it is going to completely fail with the instigator. Here is a simple rule, if you don’t fight back and turtle up (like a bitch) you don’t get a penalty the guy who jumped you gets 2 for Roughing and Misconduct. However you probably will get punched in the face a few times and look like a sissy to the rest of the league. The players police themselves and head shots drop down, without killing your team with a 5 min major penalty against.

by chrislanci on Oct 6, 2009 5:05 PM EDT up reply actions