Big Bad Blog AT&T Blog Network

First period summary: Bruins-Canadiens

03.13.10 at 7:57 pm ET
By   |   Comments

Barring any dramatic playoff runs, Saturday’s game between the Bruins and Canadiens will be the last time the teams see each other this season. The Habs lead the series 2-1-2 and start the day two points ahead of Boston in the playoff picture (though the B’s do have three games in hand).

The Canadiens would love a clean win to put the Bruins behind them and started the first period like they were on a mission to do just that. Boston went on a quick power play (Hamrlik elbowing 2:46) but could not generate much and ceded the man-advantage to the Habs a few minutes later (Mark Stuart holding 5:02).

The Canadiens knew what to do.

Montreal took a minute setting up the power play and set up Andrei Markov for a wrist shot that weaved through traffic (probably off Bruins’ defender Dennis Seidenberg) passed goaltender Tuukka Rask for the early lead.

The Habs kept the pressure on Rask and the Bruins for the latter half of the period with aggressive play in all three zones. They were rewarded for their effort much like the were on their first goal — kill a penalty then come back and light the lamp on the other side. Jaroslav Spacek went to the box (tripping 17:03) but the Habs kept the puck tied up on the half wall and eventually broke out in the final seconds of the power play with a breakaway by Tomas Plekanec that Rask was able to stifle.

It was too early for Rask to let his guard down though as Sergei Kostitsyn snuck in with the puck and scored on a backhand at 19:20 to gives Montreal a 2-0 lead heading into the second period. The Bruins have not trailed by two since the last time they played the Canadiens in the first game back from the Olympic break.

Shots through first:

Bruins — 6

Canadiens — 7

Read More: Andrei Markov, Jaroslav Spacek, Mark Stuart, Sergei Kostitsyn

Colin Campbell on D&C: Complete transcript

03.12.10 at 12:59 pm ET
By   |   Comments

After no suspension was given to Matt Cooke for his hit on Marc Savard ‘€” which may have ended the center’s season ‘€” Colin Campbell, the league’s vice president and director of hockey operations, spoke with Dennis & Callahan on Friday to discuss the process of giving out suspensions in the NHL.

Bruins fans have been up in arms about the decision not to suspend Cooke, and Campbell gave a response.

‘€œYou think I like what happened to Marc Savard?’€ Campbell said. ‘€œI coached him. I was his first coach for the New York Rangers when Marc broke in. I didn’€™t like what happened to Marc Savard, no one likes what happened. You would like to do something to the player who did it. You have to stay consistent and I can’€™t make up a rule for a play.’€

Campbell also discussed the new rule changes next season that would aim to curb hits to the head and warned what could happen if things got ugly in the next Penguins-Bruins matchup.

Read below for the transcript. To listen to the interview, click here.

Would it be a shock to you to know that you are not a fan favorite in Boston?

Really, you think?

We thought you would suspend Cooke so he wouldn’€™t be on the ice on Thursday? So that’€™s good that he will play.

You have to be careful, though. I understand that you want to exact justice. We had a hit a few years ago in Colorado and Vancouver, and they didn’€™t feel that the right thing was done. They thought they would take justice into their own hands, and next thing you know you got a real mess on your hands when [Todd] Bertuzzi broke [Steve] Moore’€™s neck. You have to be careful how it’€™s done.

Explain your logic that the hit on Savard was not a cheap shot that may have ended his season?

I can understand by the tone and what your question is that you don’€™t agree, but it’€™s not my line of thinking. We meet regularly with the general managers. We have a criteria we use on these hits. Cheap shots or head shots are elbows and sticks. In hockey, shoulder checks are allowed. I’€™ve suspended people before when they hit players in the head late and we have criteria for late, this wasn’€™t late. We have criteria for the players who jump and he didn’€™t leave his feet. We have criteria when it is unsuspecting, maybe when a player dumps the puck in and his heading to the bench and isn’€™t expecting to get hit. Marc had just shot the puck and he was in the slot area, so he shouldn’€™t have been unsuspecting, and we’€™ve had examples of that before. It certainly wasn’€™t the popular decision, but you can’€™t do this job and be the good guys or popular guy all the time. You have to use criteria and be consistent and thinking it was the right thing and not the popular one for sure.

Was Savard not blindsided? Was he not vulnerable? He didn’€™t see it coming.

Neither did a lot of players that Scott Stevens hit. I’€™m sure I can pull a few Boston hits where players weren’€™t suspecting because they didn’€™t think they were going to be hit, but they were. Unsuspecting is if you are not driving through the hockey area. Marc just shot the puck. We have two other plays where [Jeff] Carter from Philadelphia hit [Ansi] Samela from New Jersey when he just shot the puck and scored. Same sort of play. Probably the most similar play, [Duncan] Keith from Chicago a pretty good player was hit by [Drew] Stafford from Buffalo, in almost the same kind of play where Keith is shooting on off side as Marc was. He was hit just after he released the puck late, in our estimation of late, and Keith missed four games to a concussion. We looked at it and we said we are not in the area where we are penalizing blows to the head by shoulders and that’€™s what we went into this meeting before the Savard-Cooke situation. We went into this meeting with the general managers to say I guess it’€™s time with the speed we generate, with the size of our players that we have to look at this.

Correct me if I’€™m wrong, but you watched this hit in a room with eight people for an hour and a half?

No. We went into the meeting before the Savard hit with this in mind to address shoulder hits to heads. They took this hit into consideration. When we added it to our 150 hits over the past four or five years to address this. WIth my own staff, I have a staff of about seven people that watch games every night. We watched this hit for say an hour.

Did everyone come to a consensus that this hit was clean?

Our staff agreed it was a consensus, even though we didn’€™t like it. We don’€™t like Cooke. We don’€™t like the way he plays or some of the things he does, but we couldn’€™t find criteria that was consistent with suspending him.

How late is late?

How late do you think it was?

Late enough.

How late do you think it was?

You mean like split-second? I’€™m asking you. You are the guy that knows the precedence. How late does it have to be to be late in your mind?

We’€™ve had two hits in the past five or six years that have been more than a second that we suspended, and they were both by the same player, Cam Janssen who is now with St. Louis. I don’€™t know if you can remember Scott Stevens hit on Paul Kariya in the finals. That was half-a-second late. On our machines you can have 30 clips, for lack of a better term, which adds up to a second. This one was 18. Thirty is one second. When people see this hit, you see it in fast motion, but slow motion looks like three or four seconds late. This one was 18. A little bit over a half-a-second.

That’€™s not qualified as late?

Not through the criteria we’€™ve used. We’€™ve debated this with general managers time and time again. Darcy Regier had the situation where [Chris] Neil hit [Chris] Drury about three or four years ago when Drury was playing for Buffalo, and he was about 21, which would be maybe three quarters of a second, in that area. They still didn’€™t determine that as late.

Would what happened to Savard be illegal and suspendable next year


Why can’€™t they just change the rule instantly?

We are in the midst of trying to do that. The process normally when you make a rule change is the general managers agree at this meeting we have in February or March. It then goes to the competition committee that was established in the last CBA, which has five players on it. We give the competition committe, made up of four general managers and owners, our recommendation on what we would like to do. We need a seven out of 10 in votes, and we need two players of that committee to vote with the general managers. If we don’€™t then we can’€™t take it to the board of governor’€™s to get it ratified. I’€™ve talked to some people at the PA, and it’€™s a little bit crazy if we have this hit again, we are going to look a little bit foolish as a league if we are going to have to wait because there is a process in place. If everyone agrees, then we need to address it right now because we don’€™t want players like Marc Savard or anybody laying at home with concussion syndromes and headaches, etc.

Didn’€™t you change the rule immediately when Sean Avery did the thing with the stick?

No. We didn’€™t change the rule. Don Van Massenhoven was doing the game, he skated over to the Rangers bench and said, ‘€œThis is an unsportsmanlike penalty. You can’€™t do that.’€ Of course the competitiveness of our coaches I got three or four calls the next morning can we do this is this legal. We said no that it is not. So we sent out a memo saying that this play is not legal. They are calling this play unsportsmanlike. The referee in the game went over and said if it persists it is an unsportsmanlike penalty and the players association grieved our process saying we can’€™t do that we have to call up the competition committee. I said, ‘€œI can’€™t call up five players in the middle of a playoff.’€ Our teams are playing right now and this is not a rule change, this is interpreting this for you. It wasn’€™t a rule change in the middle of a game or a season.

Do you worry about somebody taking out a superstar in a playoff series?

I worry about any player, not just the superstar. I understand what you mean from the competitive aspect, but I worry about any player being hurt with a check like this, and I worried all along about this. I think every time you make a rule change you are not sure exactly what is going to come into play. When we changed the rules during the lockout, we took the red line out. We took away hooking, holding and interference. We generated a lot of speed in the game and for example the Washington vs. Pittsburgh series was maybe one of the best series, if not the best in a long time. The finals was great. Having said that, the speed we generated, the contact, the hits that are happening out there now, this is what you have and now we have to address that. On a lot of these plays you have no alternative but to use a body check. You can’€™t use your stick. You can’€™t reach out and grab a guy because you will get a penalty. It’€™s so competitive now that players don’€™t want to take penalties. They have to use their bodies to stop people and this is what the result is.

A body check to the shoulder or chest is much different to the head.

Exactly. It wasn’€™t illegal before to use your shoulder to hit a players head. Elbows yes, jumping yes, but not shoulders. What you will get when we change this rule eventually, hopefully sooner than later, you’€™ll get some players embellishing that they got hit in the head to draw a penalty. They will lay down. We got that when we put the hitting from behind in. Players will jump their feet up, go against the boards and lay dow for a while to try and extract the penalty to win the game. That’€™s another yin for yang when you make these rule changes.

What if Michael Ryder decided to go after Cooke and got revenge immediately? Would he be subject to fines from your office?

It depends what he did. If he did something illegal, yes.

Couldn’€™t you suspend Cooke if you wanted to?

You think I like what happened to Marc Savard? I coached him. I was his first coach for the New York Rangers when Marc broke in. I didn’€™t like what happened to Marc Savard, no one likes what happened. You would like to do something to the player who did it. You have to stay consistent and I can’€™t make up a rule for a play. In this case I couldn’€™t make it up because something is going to happen. The way it works out if something happens in two days and we don’€™t like the guy, let’€™s make something up and sit him down. We don’€™t like him, even though we think it wasn’€™t OK, he didn’€™t have to do what he did. When he said intent to injure, it’€™s got to be for a match penalty for elbowing. A match penalty for intent to injure cross checking. A match penalty for intent to injure for kneeing, for biting, for a sucker shot on a punch after the fight is over. You have to have a reason to match the intent to injure to something.

Sometimes the elbow is part of the upper arm?

I know, but this wasn’€™t an elbow, it was a shoulder. We looked at everything. Normally we have to make the decision between 10:30 at night and 11 the next morning because our policy is to make a decision before the team plays its next game. In this case, we had from Sunday until Thursday, a rarity for a team not to play that long. We had lots of times to make up things, but we couldn’€™t make up anything. I wish I could have but we couldn’€™t.

Does Cooke’€™s track record not give you more leeway to do something?

Only when we find that the act he did is wrong, then we can jump on him hard. But we have to find out that he was wrong in what he did.

Will you be on high alert when the Penguins and Bruins meet again?

You blew by my first statment. What happens is not good. Having Marc Savard or any player injured, you don’€™t like those things. That was our main thrust, concussions. We have to reduce concussions Even though we have a lot of games and we have 50,000 to 60,000 registered hits a year, there is probably 10 to 15 we don’€™t like. We want to reduce the concussions. Having said that, what happened with Moore and Bertuzzi and the ensuing court cases that are still ongoing, the lawsuits are huge, a $35 million law suit has been registered, ownership, managers, coaches, players have been brought into court. You have to be careful when you get into a situation like this, because it can become a lot bigger than what we have now.

Savard’s mother: ‘I would have hit [Cooke] myself’

03.12.10 at 11:41 am ET
By   |   Comments

The mother of injured Bruins center Marc Savard gave an interview to the Ottawa Citizen and expressed her disappointment with the fact that no disciplinary action was taken against Penguins forward Matt Cooke for his hit Sunday.

Rollande Savard said she saw the play on television and feared the worst. ‘€œI was watching the game at my parents’€™ house and I saw a man lying on the ice and I said, ‘€˜Mom, that’€™s Marc, I can tell by his skates,’€™ and I totally lost it,’€ she said. ‘€œThere was a fight going on at the other end and, for a few seconds, he was just lying there. It’€™s just so hard to see that. I really thought he was dead, and I saw the stretcher come out.’€

NHL disciplinarian Colin Campbell spoke with Dennis & Callahan Friday morning and said he wanted to penalize Cooke but had no rule on which to base a suspension. Rollande Savard isn’t happy with Campbell’s explanation or his demeanor. ‘€œThings like that can happen, we all understand, but then I saw Colin Campbell talking on TV and he has no sympathy whatsoever,’€ she said.

‘€œIf I would have been there, I would have hit him myself,” she added. “[Cooke] tried to take Marc out. He should be out. That kid shouldn’€™t be playing. He should be penalized. We all know it shouldn’€™t be allowed in the game and we hear this stuff about new rules taking effect next year. That’€™s bull. Do something now. That guy [Cooke] is laughing at everyone. My son could be out forever. Who knows? With this Matt Cooke, do something right now. He’€™s hit guys like that before. He has a track record.’€

Campbell: ‘I couldn’t make up’ rule to suspend Cooke

03.12.10 at 9:32 am ET
By   |   Comments

NHL senior vice president of hockey operations Colin Campbell was a guest of the Dennis & Callahan show Friday morning to discuss his decision not to suspend Penguins forward Matt Cooke for his hit to the head of Bruins center Marc Savard that may have ended Savard’s season (listen to the interview here). Said Campbell: “Look, it certainly wasn’t the popular decision, but you can’t do this job and try to be a good guy or popular all the time. You have to use criteria and try to be consistent. In our thinking it was the right thing, but not the popular thing, for sure.”

Added Campbell: “It’s not my line of thinking. We meet regularly with the general managers. We have criteria we use on these hits. And cheap shot, head shot is elbows, sticks. In hockey, shoulder checks are allowed.”

Asked why he couldn’t have used intent to injure as a reason, Campbell replied: “We looked at everything. When you say intent to injure … you have to have a reason to attach the intent to injure to something.”

Campbell said his staff agreed on the decision but made his displeasure with Cooke known. “Our staff agreed, it was a consensus, even though we didn’t like it, we don’t like Cooke, we don’t like the way he plays and some things he does,” Campbell said. “We couldn’t find criteria that was consistent with suspending him.”

Campbell said he has a personal connection to Savard that made this decision even more difficult. “You think I like what happened to Marc Savard? I coached him, I was his first coach with the New York Rangers when Marc broke in,” Campbell said. “I didn’t like what happened to Marc Savard. No one liked what happened. And you would like to do something to the player that did it. But you have to stay consistent, and I can’t make up a rule for a play. In this case, I couldn’t make it up.”

As for suggestions that the Bruins will get revenge during their rematch with the Penguins next Thursday, Campbell brought up the Todd Bertuzzi-Steve Moore situation from February and March of 2004. In that case, Moore, an Avalanche forward, checked a Canucks player, causing a concussion, but was not penalized or suspended. In the rematch — coincidentally, after Cooke, then a member of the Canucks, fought Moore in the first period — Bertuzzi went after Moore and punched and pulled him down from behind, causing a fractured neck that ended Moore’s career. Bertuzzi was suspended and pleaded guilty to assault, and Moore filed a lawsuit against Bertuzzi and the Canucks that still is in the court system. “You want to take justice in your hands,” Campbell said. “Next thing you know you’ve a real mess on your hands when Bertuzzi broke Moore’s neck.”

Chiarelli: Loss of Savard ‘devastating’

03.12.10 at 6:53 am ET
By   |   Comments

Bruins GM Peter Chiarelli said before Thursday’s game that center Marc Savard will likely miss the rest of the season as a result of the Grade 2 concussion he suffered against the Pittsburgh Penguins on Sunday. That assessment came after Savard met with MGH neuropsychologist Kelly McInnis and showed little improvement in his symptoms since suffering the Matt Cooke hit.

“There is a good chance that Marc may be out for the rest of the year,” Chiarelli told reporters. “He is one of our best players, so it is devastating to us.”

Savard’s mother, Rollande Savard, told the Ottawa Citizen that she was incensed by the hit and the failure to suspend Cooke.

‘€œIt’€™s just so hard to see that. I really thought he was dead and I saw the stretcher come out,’€ she told the paper. ‘€œIf I would have been there, I would have hit him myself. [Cooke] tried to take Marc out. He should be out. That kid shouldn’€™t be playing. He should be penalized. We all know it shouldn’€™t be allowed in the game and we hear this stuff about new rules taking effect next year.

‘€œThat’€™s bull. Do something now. That guy [Cooke] is laughing at everyone. My son could be out forever. Who knows? With this Matt Cooke, do something right now. He’€™s hit guys like that before. He has a track record.’€

Bruins soar over Flyers

03.11.10 at 9:31 pm ET
By   |   Comments

Summary — The Bruins are chasing the Flyers in the playoff standings and did themselves a big favor on Thursday night by breaking down Philadelphia for a 5-1 win at the Wachovia Center. Tuukka Rask got the start for the Bruins and earned his 15th victory with 31 of saves. Michael Leighton started for the Flyers and allowed four goals on 25 shots and left the game in the second period in favor of Brian Boucher.

Boston used a three-goal second period to separate themselves from the Flyers. With the score tied at one, Patrice Bergeron and Mark Recchi got together at 4:37. Bergeron took a feed off the wall from defenseman Dennis Seidenberg and flipped the puck to Recchi rushing close to Leighton on the left wing. Leighton went down, Recchi went high and it was 2-1 Boston. Bergeron then made it 3-1 by returning a puck to the net after a Matt Hunwick shot from the point that bounced off Leighton’s chest. The fourth came courtesy of David Krejci who was the recipent of a good string of passes from Blake Wheeler to Michael Ryder to Krejci in front of the net who turn, hesitated and beat Leighton at 11:16 for the three-goal advantage.

Boston forward Blake Wheeler got Boston on the board to lead off the scoring in the first period when he took a feed from center David Krejci on a 3-on-2 break at 13:15. Wheeler side-stepped defender Lukas Krajicek and deposited a backhander past Leighton for the goal advantage.

The Flyers tied it on the power play early in the second period (Seidenberg — boarding) when Jeff Carter hit a one-timer from the dot that Rask did not have much a chance on to tie it before the Bruins broke out.

Marco Sturm scored a goal in the third period to account for the final score.

Miroslav Satan did not play for the Bruins with what has been reported as as groin injury. Captain Zdeno Chara returned to the lineup after missing one game with a lower body injury.

Three Stars

Patrice Bergeron — It would be much easier to just give the Bergeron’s whole line a single, large star for the week and be done with it. Bergeron had a goal and an assist to continue his hot streak with two goals and two assists in the last two games.

David Krejci — Krejci set up the first goal with a hustle play and score the fourth with good presence in front of the net and looks like he may be finally rounding into form the Bruins have been expecting all year.

Blake Wheeler — The ying to Krejci’s yang on the night also had a goal and an assist to help spur the Bruins effort.

Turning Point — The Bruins do not see a lot of two-goal leads these days. On Tuesday they had three separate one-goal leads and eventually blew every one of them and then the game. Not so on Thursday against the Flyers. The third goal of the night gave the Bruins a lead they could be comfortable with. Hunwick hit a slap shot from the left point that got tied up in front of the net and popped onto the stick of Bergeron who flipped it back at Leighton and in.

Key Play — Two-goal leads? How about three-goal leads? The Bruins have not scored more than three goals in a game since they had five against Tampa Bay before the Olympic break. Boston has spent a lot of practice time in the last few months working on creating goals in front of the net through deflections, rebounds and overall aggressive play in the crease. Krejci did just that when he took a pass from Ryder and skated around Leighton for the fourth goal of the game.

Read More: Blake Wheeler, David Kreci, Marco Sturm, Mark Recchi

Second period summary: Bruins-Flyers

03.11.10 at 8:40 pm ET
By   |   Comments

The pattern continues …

Or does it?

The Flyers did not waste anytime mounting their comeback from a goal back. Bruins defenseman Dennis Seidenberg went to the box 40 seconds into the second period for boarding. The ensuing faceoff came in Boston’s zone and Flyers’ sharp shooter Jeff Carter found the puck on the left circle for a one-timer that beat Tuukka Rask at :44.

The Bruins went back up, just like they did numerous times against Toronto on Tuesday. Patrice Bergeron found Mark Recchi closing in on Michael Leighton from the left wing on the rush. Leighton went down for the shot, Recchi went up and it was 2-1 at 4:37.

This is where the pattern breaks.

Whereas in against the Maple Leafs the Bruins kept on letting Toronto come back, the Bruins are burying Leighton and the Flyers heading into the third. The lead burgeoned from one to three by the 11:16 mark when David Krejci got his second point of the night after a feed from Blake Wheeler and Michael Ryder.

Really, the equation has looked simple. Get in front of Leighton and try to make a play. The third goal was a rebound put back by Patrice Bergeron off a heavy shot from the point by Matt Hunwick at 10:30. Krejci’s goal was a matter of sitting in front of Leighton, getting the puck, waiting a half-second to let Leighton get himself out of position and depositing the puck to the scoring bank.

The game heads to the third with a 4-1 score in Boston’s favor.

Shots through second period (total):

Bruins — 14 (27)

Flyers -16 (23)

Read More: Blake Wheeler, David Krejci, Mark Recchi, Michael Ryder
Bruins Headlines
NHL Headlines