Fighting & Responding in Hockey

Much has been made in the recent years when it comes to guys responding by dropping the gloves because of a big hit. The days of staged fights with fourth line enforcers is pretty well extinct. Many of the rule changes made since the beginning of the cap era have had some sort of negative impact that wasn’t intended.

More from Editorials

Trying to eliminate head-shots starting making guys go lower for hits. Somewhere along the way, turning your back to a player on the boards at the last second when they’re coming for a hit became a fad. Those are just a couple examples from the physical evolution in the modern NHL.

No matter where you stand on the issue of fighting in hockey, there’s two things worth noting. One, it’s not likely to ever disappear from the game. Secondly, if you’ve ever attended any junior or professional hockey game, fans only get riled up for two things. The home team scoring, or two good ol’ boys dropping the mitts.

So is it really surprising that injuries keep mounting higher and higher each year? Not really if you look at the stats. We’re talking about a league 10-15 years ago where most teams had one guy with at least 200+ PIM. Go back, and it wasn’t uncommon that your top 20 PIM guys were all over 200 with some in the 300 range, maybe even higher. In 14-15, Steve Downie was the lone player over 200 PIM (238 to be exact). Only 14 players between 100-191. 17-20 in PIMs were all under 100. Why does it matter? Well hits keep rising.

Sep 21, 2015; Calgary, Alberta, CAN; Calgary Flames right wing Hunter Smith (71) and Edmonton Oilers defenseman Darnell Nurse (25) fight during the second period at Scotiabank Saddledome. Mandatory Credit: Sergei Belski-USA TODAY Sports

Hits Per Game

2010-2011: 55911 (45.46)
2011-2012: 55986 (45.52)
2012-2013: 34269 (47.59) 48-games
2013-2014: 57845 (47.03)
2014-2015: 61476 (49.98)

It’s basic logic. If major penalties and fighting has been trending down over the years, while hits are constantly increasing, the risk for injury would therefore increase.

There’s a mythical thought that “responding” to big hits has been some sort of epidemic in recent years. But the numbers suggest that fighting majors are going down as hits are going up. Wouldn’t that mean that response per hit would be going down as well? I think there’s a common misconception that players who are enforcers or fight lack skill somehow. The following list is littered with guys who had the ability to produce as well.

The game has evolved though, it has gotten faster with a boat load more skill which has essentially pushed out enforcers. But these guys served a very important purpose that is often overlooked. They protected the skill guys. You couldn’t take a run at a star player without being held accountable for it.

So I propose the following the idea. Responding for these big hits is absolutely necessary for teams to protect their young stars. We’ve already seen Sidney Crosby amongst many other good players having to deal with the reprecautions that came from rule changes in the modern NHL.

How good would it be for hockey if Sidney Crosby took one more big hit to the head, or if someone ended Connor McDavid’s career. It’s not just important for a team to protect its stars, its important for the league as a whole. Because if hits keep going up and fighting keeps going down, that equals higher vulnerability to injuries to those stars.

Lets use Monday night to show you what I mean. Leafs D

Roman Polak

stepped up for prospect F Connor Brown after he took a big hit along the boards by David Dzuirzynski. Polak is an old warrior who understands the psychological side of the game.

Sometimes taking that extra 10 minute misconduct and 2 minute instigator putting your team shorthanded is what has to be done. We’re not even gonna get started on the instigator rule today, as I guarantee I’m in the majority for those who put it among the top for worst rules in hockey.

10-15 years ago that would have been 5 each for fighting. But whether it happened years ago or last night (like the Polak incident), both had the same result. It sent a message to the Senators. It said if you wanna take runs at our top young players, you better be ready to answer the bell.

Polak sent a very similar message earlier in the game. Roman Polak manhandled a Sens player in front of the net who lost control of the puck, but made no effort to get out of the way of G Jonathan Bernier. Yes he was pushed in, but you must try to avoid contact with the goalie as best you can. He chose not to, and Polak started a nasty scrum. Again sending a message that, we will not tolerate bumps or pokes at our netminder.

Minnesota Wild's six-game preseason schedule consists of Central Division foes

Gone Puck Wild

Jackets Dump Blues 7-0Union and Blue

Is Kent Johnson the Answer at Center?Union and Blue

Minnesota Wild's familiar, and new, faces to take ice in preseason openerGone Puck Wild

Carolina Hurricanes: What have we learned from pre-seasonCardiac Cane

Red Wings: 2021 Preseason Preview and StorylinesOctopus Thrower

Now compare this to a recent story, “McDavid takes massive hit” in which we saw a limited response from the Oilers when Canucks F Jake Virtanen laid a big hit, very similar to the one Connor Brown took on Monday night. Some Oilers fans want you to believe there was a response on the play. But a couple guys getting into your face doing nothing physically, probably telling you to “keep your head up” does little to nothing to refrain a guy from doing it again. Take it from me, I played the pest role during my hockey career. A couple little bumps and running your mouth does nothing to intimidate.

So where do you stand on “responding” to big hits on your star players? I know it’s one of those controversial topics so there will be those of you who do not agree with what I have to say. I only know what I’ve seen every day of my life, through watching and playing the sport.

Why do I say fighting will never disappear? It’s a physical sport. The intensity is high. And the adrenaline is pumping. These things tend to clash and explode into physical confrontations. Sure you could eliminate fighting, if you were to eliminate the physical side of the game.

If you like puck hogs and cherry pickers maybe someone should start up a 4-on-4 or 3-on-3 league. This is the NHL. Even Women’s hockey is physical. No hitting is not technically allowed, but it happens because these females are getting better and better as their game evolves. And as the game of hockey evolves, so too does the physical side.

Players might not be bigger nowadays, but they’re definitely stronger as more importance is stressed to being in better physical shape and off-season training. So perhaps if we make the game less physical than the women’s game, then we can eliminate fighting (not a shot at females by any means).

I do question how many of those “against fighting” are truly knowledgeable hockey fans. I question how many of them have ever attended a game in their life. Are they the only person in the rink who’s adrenaline isn’t pumping when two guys drop the mitts? I’ve never seen a person turn their back or walk out of a rink because of a fight. Everyone gets excited, so what exactly is the problem?

Is it just the way of the world now where people think they need to be big brother and make decisions for everyone else? Or the way of the world now where even if your opinion is not shared by most people that somehow your minority opinion is enough to ruin it for the rest?

Why do we care so much about a topic like this that survived just fine for decades upon decades. Every hockey player knows what they’re signing up for, and they know the risks. I myself have dealt with a couple concussions over my hockey career. Whether I played hockey, or some other sport the injury risk would always be there. So while it’s fine to make changes to make the game safer, you can’t start making steps to try and eliminate an integral part of the game, like fighting.

Next: NHL training camp: News and Notes

More from Puck Prose