No doubt that Stevens laid out some nice clean hits but his highlight reel contains plenty of questionable hits like Kariya and Lindros
- HankdaTank

I hated him but respected the f*ck out of Stevens, warrior & gamer. The Devils were a perpetual joke (Mickey Mouse anyone?) for their first ten years primarily & the day he got there it all changed. Those hits back then were very rarely penalized.

No doubt that Stevens laid out some nice clean hits but his highlight reel contains plenty of questionable hits like Kariya and Lindros
- HankdaTank

*At the time nice and clean, I'm under no illusion that a lot of those hits would land him a hearing these days. But even the highlights, the Kozlov, the Kariya, the Lindros, he never simply put a shoulder into the head, it was a full body hit, (yes head included).

I hated him but respected the f*ck out of Stevens, warrior & gamer. The Devils were a perpetual joke (Mickey Mouse anyone?) for their first ten years primarily & the day he got there it all changed. Those hits back then were very rarely penalized.
- B2B76

Sup Bri!

Plain & Simple the league missed this one, Haula was in vulerable position and Moore took full advantage of it.
Lets hope the PSD in the future really puts the foot on the throat of repeat offenders when they get caught doing the same stupid BS.
Really hope that Haula's incedent earlier in the seasons didn't somehow affect the punishment handed out in this situation, that would be a really miserable reason for Moore only being given a 5 gamer for this unneeded hit.

Plain & Simple the league missed this one, Haula was in vulerable position and Moore took full advantage of it.
Lets hope the PSD in the future really puts the foot on the throat of repeat offenders when they get caught doing the same stupid BS.
Really hope that Haula's incedent earlier in the seasons didn't somehow affect the punishment handed out in this situation, that would be a really miserable reason for Moore only being given a 5 gamer for this unneeded hit.
- ice-crazy

I don't think 5 games and a 50k+ loss of income is a complete miss.

Sup Bri!
- evitageN

Nicky Santoro, que pasa?!

Watch either video Stevens took the body (as well as the head). Not saying that the hits Stevens delivered were safe, and the league is trying to take them out of the gaem (allegedly). Find me an instance where Stevens hit the head and only the head as in this Moore hit, or a perfect example, Cooke on Savard. If Stevens caught you with your head down he was going to hit you, and hard, call them predatory or what you will but I cannot remember a hit where a shoulder or elbow hit the head and the head only.
- smellmyfinger

At the time they were legal. But not so much the head contact. They were just late.

Cryder shouldve gotten at least that many too

terrible call and i'm a flyers fan
corey perry does poop worse than that all the time

terrible call and i'm a flyers fan
corey perry does poop worse than that all the time
- 2Real

If he didn't make contact with the head I'm 100% good with the hit. I don't like this new you can't hit a vulnerable player nonsense or u have to ease up. I don't like the shoulders/elbows to the head but a good clean hard hit where a part of your body touches the head due to momentum/finishing your check just because the guy is vulnerable is nonsense to me.

Expected anywhere from 5-10 games. Well deserved, completely unnecessary dirty hit.

If not sooner, by next offseason I don't see Moore as a member of the Rangers roster. We all saw the potential, but dude hasn't progressed. With the emergence of Hunwick, and the projection of Skjei, his replacement is coming up fast nd without baggage.

If he didn't make contact with the head I'm 100% good with the hit. I don't like this new you can't hit a vulnerable player nonsense or u have to ease up. I don't like the shoulders/elbows to the head but a good clean hard hit where a part of your body touches the head due to momentum/finishing your check just because the guy is vulnerable is nonsense to me.
- nyrangers9479

looked like he got the chest and the head was an after thought didn't look like a head hunting hit

If he didn't make contact with the head I'm 100% good with the hit. I don't like this new you can't hit a vulnerable player nonsense or u have to ease up. I don't like the shoulders/elbows to the head but a good clean hard hit where a part of your body touches the head due to momentum/finishing your check just because the guy is vulnerable is nonsense to me.
- nyrangers9479

Not to single you out, but welcome to the ambiguous rule book of the modern day NHL. Between goalie interference calls, the coincidental minor penalties, potential head shots nd the random length of suspensions..the rule book needs to be more concrete

Not to single you out, but welcome to the ambiguous rule book of the modern day NHL. Between goalie interference calls, the coincidental minor penalties, potential head shots nd the random length of suspensions..the rule book needs to be more concrete
- MeanestOfTimes

I agree but I think there's a place in the game for alot of things they are trying to get rid of

Your team would have an AHL lineup if that were the case.....
- Downeaster

really? please list all incidents that would create your scenario. i happen to agree with him. i don't care what jersey you wear, these kinds of hits need to stop.

really? please list all incidents that would create your scenario. i happen to agree with him. i don't care what jersey you wear, these kinds of hits need to stop.
- hammarby31

If no contact is made to his head are u OK with the hit while he's vulnerable?

That angle looks like shoulder to the chest
- nyrangers9479

No, actually it doesn't. It looks like a player taking advantage of a player who's head is down (knowingly) immediately after releasing a shot.

The hit was unnecessary given the circumstances of the puck already being shot, granted Haula was in a position to be "legally" hit by Moore. However that was not the case.... Sure you can sit and claim it may have been an initial hit to the chest, but clearly by the motion of Moores elbow at the end of the hit, he was purposely trying to come up through the head area of Haula intentionally.

See it how you want, but this was a flagrant and reckless play by Moore and he deserved to get more games based on being a repeat offender.

If he didn't make contact with the head I'm 100% good with the hit. I don't like this new you can't hit a vulnerable player nonsense or u have to ease up. I don't like the shoulders/elbows to the head but a good clean hard hit where a part of your body touches the head due to momentum/finishing your check just because the guy is vulnerable is nonsense to me.
- nyrangers9479

This was not a good clean hit. Whether he glanced off the chest or not, the main point of contact was in fact the head on a vulnerable player that had clearly already shot the puck. There was no longer any reason for the hit. So if you want to put players careers in harms way because YOU think player safety is nonsense then you need to go watch rugby.

You're okay with this hit because it's your player doling it out, but should roles be reversed, I'm guessing you'd be taking the side of reason. No need to be blasting guys in vulnerable positions just because it's "legal". And if it's putting players and their careers in jeopardy, well then they shouldn't be deemed legal.

No, actually it doesn't. It looks like a player taking advantage of a player who's head is down (knowingly) immediately after releasing a shot.

The hit was unnecessary given the circumstances of the puck already being shot, granted Haula was in a position to be "legally" hit by Moore. However that was not the case.... Sure you can sit and claim it may have been an initial hit to the chest, but clearly by the motion of Moores elbow at the end of the hit, he was purposely trying to come up through the head area of Haula intentionally.

See it how you want, but this was a flagrant and reckless play by Moore and he deserved to get more games based on being a repeat offender.
- MnGump

I don't think anyone here is saying it wasn't reckless, some have varying degrees of how vicious they see it, I thought he deserved more but I thought Prust deserved more too as well as Gryba getting something for the hit on Anisimov

I thought it probably deserved 6-8 games as a repeat offender, but whatever.

This is a guy who was very close to being a healthy scratch with the way he was playing anyway. Boyle's injury is probably only thing that was keeping him in lineup.

Scott Stevens like Denis Potvin before him, were mean, tough defensemen who always played the game like the hated the opponent every night. Their careers are filled with questionable hits that in todays game would earn them a seat in the press box numerous times. However, they also the very type of Dman every team wishes, or least they should, have on their squad every night.

That angle looks like shoulder to the chest
- nyrangers9479

No it doesn't.

Scott Stevens like Denis Potvin before him, were mean, tough defensemen who always played the game like the hated the opponent every night. Their careers are filled with questionable hits that in todays game would earn them a seat in the press box numerous times. However, they also the very type of Dman every team wishes, or least they should, have on their squad every night.
- OLDSCHOOL#6

I think of Pronger too, not as good as the other 2 but man was he mean. Always loved those D men when we had them, Beuke, Ulf, but of course hate them as the opponent.

The crazy thing about Moore is that while he is a repeat offender, and got what he deserved, the guy is really not an overly physical player. He doesn't play on the edge. Indeed, if you remove those two suspendable instances, he is pretty vanilla and not a player you would even consider dirty or reckless. Now, I understand that the two suspensions need to be taken into account, but its just kind of weird that John Moore is now a repeated offender, because he is otherwise not very physical.

No it doesn't.
- eichiefs9

Yes it does.