Dan Wallace: Wild Match 2016 Win Total in Just 55 Games

He got hit, threw a tantrum and lashed out. The only example I can think of that went down like that was Keith on Coyle, and he only got 6 games...Letang didn't get any for a similar high stick, though under different circumstances.

It seems like the suspension is relative to the player's importance to the team...So Nyquist is having a down year, maybe he gets 10+...they should make an example sooner rather than later - should have done it with one of those two last year. If everyone thought Chicago or Pittsburgh lost out on a good playoff race because their star D was suspended, then guys would be wayyy more careful to avoid that kind of thing.

Nasty. But I'm sure he'll claim he didn't mean too and it was an accident and the department of player safety being the joke that it is will give him something minimal. Should be at least 5-10 games in my opinion.

Perhaps if the Wild quit attacking opponents with cheap, vicious cross-checks to the back, they wouldn't get a stick to the face in retaliation.

Wasn't the Wild also the team that slashed and hacked at Johnny Hockey, breaking his wrist/hand?

Will 'Dr. Hook' McCracken will be in the Wild lineup for the playoffs?

Perhaps if the Wild quit attacking opponents with cheap, vicious cross-checks to the back, they wouldn't get a stick to the face in retaliation.

Wasn't the Wild also the team that slashed and hacked at Johnny Hockey, breaking his wrist/hand?

Will 'Dr. Hook' McCracken will be in the Wild lineup for the playoffs?
- scottak

Yes, the Wild should quit playing Hockey! Good call! Because none of the other teams in the league cross check anyone. And it's obvious the proper retaliation should be swift chop to the face!

Certainly not going to try to defend it - can't say what he was thinking, but it looked pretty bad. Using Keith as the yardstick and given Keith had previous discipline and Gus hasn't, logic (I know, I know) would dictate it can't be more than 5, right?

6 or 8 games.

He should get 15...but I Im thinking 6 or 8

If the NHL wants to get rid of these types of plays, I think a 12 game suspension should fit the bill. That makes it a little less then 1/2 of the rest of the season, would hit Nyquist for about $315k in missed paychecks. There is NO WAY he can say it was an accident and that he didn't mean to do it. The close ups that NBC showed, he turns and looks directly at Spurgeon before swinging his stick. Even bringing in the idea that he was trying to hit a player in the chest and that Spurgeon is that much shorter than most players doesn't work, as Nyquist clearly looks at him before swinging. I'm just glad we aren't talking about seeing an eyeball popped out on the ice.

On the lighter side, maybe the scar from this will help Spurgeon not look like a 12 year old babyface for the future.

Certainly not going to try to defend it - can't say what he was thinking, but it looked pretty bad. Using Keith as the yardstick and given Keith had previous discipline and Gus hasn't, logic (I know, I know) would dictate it can't be more than 5, right?
- skindzier

I'd be okay with 5 or 6. The player safety commity needs to come up with some uniformity on these calls of course taking into consideration the players track record. First time infraction of this type of egregious play should be minimum 5 games. Then it should just be multiplied for each future infraction with 5 games added each time... so 2nd time would 10 games plus an additional 5 games... 3rd time would be 15 plus 5 and so on.

looks like graovac's opportunity to be on the team for the playoffs is over. 10 isn't gonna work at C he's to small. wonder who fletch is eyeballing for 4th C. haula maybe with coyle at 3rd

Yes, the Wild should quit playing Hockey! Good call! Because none of the other teams in the league cross check anyone. And it's obvious the proper retaliation should be swift chop to the face! -MNGump
Yes, great idea. Because 'everyone does it' then it's OK? Players that break the rules and attempt to injure opponents should be aware that they may be targets of retribution. It's been that way since the league was formed. And a cross-check across the back is an attempt to injure.


Is Nyquist due a suspension? Absolutely. It doesn't make the cross-check OK. Or legal.

And where was the suspension of a Wild players for the slash of Gaudreau? Calgary may miss the playoffs this year because the Wild used their sticks in JG's hand.

I'd be okay with 5 or 6. The player safety commity needs to come up with some uniformity on these calls of course taking into consideration the players track record. First time infraction of this type of egregious play should be minimum 5 games. Then it should just be multiplied for each future infraction with 5 games added each time... so 2nd time would 10 games plus an additional 5 games... 3rd time would be 15 plus 5 and so on.
- MnGump

I think their best opportunity to get it out of the game was last season. If they nailed Keith or Letang for their high sticks which would have very likely cost their teams a playoff series (didn't matter in Chicago's case in the end), then I think that would be it. Letang got nothing and Keith got a nice rest in before the playoffs started. I don't think management or coaching in Detroit really care if Nyqvuist gets suspended at this point.

Yes, great idea. Because 'everyone does it' then it's OK?
- scottak

yes, the same logic you use when sleeping with your sister

Worst play I've seen in a long time. An inch higher and it would've looked like Bryan Berrard out there. That's so far from a hockey play that it's not even funny, and personally, I find the fact that he blatantly lies about it, rather than taking responsibility, makes it even harder to forgive Gus for.

Crazy or not I believe he should be suspended for the remainder of the NHL regular season. THAT is setting an example.

Yes, the Wild should quit playing Hockey! Good call! Because none of the other teams in the league cross check anyone. And it's obvious the proper retaliation should be swift chop to the face! -MNGump
Yes, great idea. Because 'everyone does it' then it's OK? Players that break the rules and attempt to injure opponents should be aware that they may be targets of retribution. It's been that way since the league was formed. And a cross-check across the back is an attempt to injure.


Is Nyquist due a suspension? Absolutely. It doesn't make the cross-check OK. Or legal.

And where was the suspension of a Wild players for the slash of Gaudreau? Calgary may miss the playoffs this year because the Wild used their sticks in JG's hand.
- scottak

what's your point? It's hockey. If you want a wussy sport go watch curling or something... Are you that dumb that you don't realize that the Hawks have had there own "breaking of the rules" transgressions themselves? It happens in pretty much every game to some extent and where on earth you get the idea that a cross check is an intent to injure is dumbfounding. I'll bet there are at least a dozen cross checks every game that go uncalled. Is it right? No, probably not, but that's hockey. Not every call is going to be made, even sticks to the face.