(Past) Time to Re-Write the Diving Rule
by J.P. on Dec 11, 2009 10:00 AM EST
70 comments
Late in the second period of Wednesday night's loss to Buffalo, Alex Ovechkin was spun around and down by the Sabres' Derek Roy. The call? Tripping on Roy... and diving on Ovechkin (his fourth career diving penalty). No doubt, this prompted a chorus of voices in Western New York and the D.C. metropolitan area asking the same question: "How can it be both a trip and a dive?"
The answer to that is pretty simple - a player can embellish what would otherwise be called a foul and thus there are two separate penalties on the play (Rules 57 and 64, in case you're curious).
The problem, however, is in the application of the diving call. Rather than being used to dissuade the embarrassing infraction that it seeks to address, the penalty seems to be used by officials to "even-up" marginal calls. If the League was serious about penalizing diving, you'd think that it would most often appear as a single infraction, one that puts the offending team on the penalty kill. But instead, what we see most often are coincidental minors (like Roy/Ovechkin) that send the exact wrong message to the diver: go ahead and embellish - you'll either get the call or, at worst, you'll be headed off with a member of the opposing team.
Putting some numbers to the observations, Gabe Desjardins over at Behind the Net looked at all of the diving calls over the past two seasons and found that 88% of them were accompanied by an off-setting penalty (most often tripping, hooking or interference). Put another way, less than one out of every eight dives that are called truly penalize the diver's team. That's a pretty staggering number.
When the NHL codified its current rule against diving, they no doubt had the best of intentions. But if they truly want to remove this shameful behavior from the game, they need to go back to the drawing board and replace what they've got with the obvious and simple solution: have a dive negate any initial infraction. You'll see a lot more players staying up on their skates, making the game easier to call... and silencing those who don't understand how there can be a trip and a dive on the same play.
5 recs |
70 comments
|
Email
Print
Comments
Can’t argue with it – and bless the sport for having the courage to accuse its players of diving through officiating in the first place.
Winterion Game Studios
Visit us online at : http://winterion.com
Given the way it gets enforced I’m not willing to praise the “courage” at this point.
You're the reason that I hate Nova Scotia.
by Fehr and Balanced on Dec 11, 2009 12:50 PM EST up reply actions
If the NHL did/encouraged more statistical analysis such as this (and listened less to the I-saw-it-with-my-own-eyes types such as Milbury), it would improve the game substantially.
by TylerG on Dec 11, 2009 10:12 AM EST reply actions 1 recs
Diving is the name of the rule and it basically constitutes of two parts.
Actual diving (such as in a “trip” where brushes a players ankles and they fall down) and
embellishment (player a trips player b but player b goes hurling like a cork screw through the air.)
Hockey players aren't like other people. Witt after being hit by a car:
I’m okay. No big deal...I’ve got to go play some hockey. I’m a hockey player.
This is one of the things that drives me crazy.
But there’s more to it than the rules. There’s an aspect of the sport’s culture that’s just come to accept diving as a minor annoyance, or even as a valid strategy. That has to change.
Look at the NFL. In theory a pass interference or even a roughing the quarterback call could be more important to the outcome of a game than a two-minute powerplay in hockey. Why don’t we see WRs hitting the turf every time a DB nudges them to try to draw a flag? Why don’t QBs flop around, hands flailing in the air, whenever somebody brushes up against them?
Simple answer: the football world wouldn’t tolerate it. If Randy Moss takes an obvious dive to draw a flag, it will be on every highlight show in America. He’ll get mocked on every pre-game show, and it will be a running joke that will follow him for the rest of his career. Howie Long would deliver a stern lecture. Jim Rome’s head would explode.
Football is a man’s game, and real men don’t dive. That’s for soccer players… OK, and punters. Even Tom Brady just calling for a flag a few weeks ago was top-of-the-broadcast fodder for a cycle or two.
Compare that to hockey. We see guys dive all the time — embarassing, obvious dives. It gets mentioned on the broadcast, maybe a coach fumes a bit after the game about bad calls, and everyone moves on. And you can bet some analyst somewhere will shrug his shoulders and call it a “smart play”.
In football, anyone who did this or this or this would never be taken seriously again. In hockey, it’s just part of the game, completely forgotten after a day or two.
The league should ask it’s broadcast and media partners to show replays of dives as often as possible. Let’s stop applauding these frauds and start embarassing them.
Down Goes Brown - Unapologetically nostalgic for the past. Brutally realistic about the present. Grudgingly optimistic about the future.
by Down Goes Brown on Dec 11, 2009 10:16 AM EST reply actions 2 recs
Interesting, I don’t think of diving as being a significant issue in the NHL. Maybe because I’ve come to see it as a minor annoyance. (Don’t look down on me). HavInG taken some really strange falls on skates, it does seem that it would be tougher to determine diving on ice than on a football field.
Could the NHL come in and fine guys for diving after the game, or does that undermine the refs too much?
Maybe the linesman can get involved in diving calls like they do with too-many-men?
Maybe make the diving call a double minor, 2 for diving, 2 for unsportsmanlike. Then you can get the trip, which was a penalty, but you stick it to the guy who tossed his gloves in the air to make sure someone saw.
"I think the relentless negative coverage in The Washington Post is a real difference from previous years," Redskins general counsel David Donovan said. "But in terms of the way our actual fans are behaving, we don't see any difference."
Maybe make the diving call a double minor, 2 for diving, 2 for unsportsmanlike.
My solution has always been to just remove the 2 minutes for diving and give the player a double unsportsmanlike. This gives the team their powerplay for the original infraction but makes the diver sit out of the game for 20 minutes. I bet a lot of players would tone it down considerably if they knew they were risking missing 1/3 of the game for doing it.
the diver sit out of the game for 20 minutes
We don’t want AO sitting out for 20 minutes because of bad refereeing.
I bet a lot of players would tone it down considerably
The problem with that is that there are really only a few honestly egregious divers, Avery being the most notable, and I can’t believe that he’d tone anything down. That basically just makes the call more ridiculous/dangerous for players like AO who get called due to bias.
by DrinkingPartner on Dec 11, 2009 10:54 AM EST up reply actions 2 recs
Making a diving call cost more than a fighting major? How could anyone justify that?
If you don't wanna get hit, KEEP YOUR HEAD UP!
I could argue for that, though — fighting is an accepted and, to some, ingrained part of the sport. So it sometimes needs to be penalized, but not too much.
Diving is not in keeping with the sport’s perceived general toughness. I’m having trouble phrasing this without using sexist terminology (ick). And I’m also not saying that I think fighting is that much more acceptable than embellishing.
"Camaraderie, that's what the Washington Capitals are all about."
by CapitalCentre on Dec 11, 2009 12:39 PM EST up reply actions
I guess my problem with this is the idea of a 20 minute unsportsmanlike. If the dive happens at 19:59 of the 2nd period, it turns into a game misconduct for somthing IMO that just isn’t THAT bad.
A double minor (2-diving, 2-unsportsmanlike) is the max i’d go for.
That’s just me.
If you don't wanna get hit, KEEP YOUR HEAD UP!
Maybe make the diving call a double minor, 2 for diving, 2 for unsportsmanlike.
The problem is that referees don’t have the gonads to call it now when it’s just two minutes. If you make it more, won’t they call it even less?
Down Goes Brown - Unapologetically nostalgic for the past. Brutally realistic about the present. Grudgingly optimistic about the future.
by Down Goes Brown on Dec 11, 2009 1:39 PM EST up reply actions
I don’t buy that there’s no embellishment in football. Several times a game, a receiver will jump up and throw his hands in the air for a flag, or mimic an initial throwing the flag. So maybe it’s not “diving” in the pure sense but clearly receivers use theatrics to try and get a call.
That’s not embellishment, that’s just arguing, and they do that in every sport.
by DrinkingPartner on Dec 11, 2009 10:58 AM EST up reply actions
And QBs do the same thing. If a guy even brushes their head, their in the referee’s face looking for a call. And how about punters (though arguably they’re not real football players) — they blatantly flop around any time they’re touched.
Love your work BTW.
Yeah, punters are the exception that proves the rule. They can flop around because they’re not considered “real” football players to begin with.
Down Goes Brown - Unapologetically nostalgic for the past. Brutally realistic about the present. Grudgingly optimistic about the future.
by Down Goes Brown on Dec 11, 2009 1:35 PM EST up reply actions
But DGB makes a good point on Tom Brady. When he did that he was laughed at in the media. Even Rodney Harrison, the biggest Patriot homer in the entire media, made fun of Tom Brady for that stunt. A little public humiliation goes a long way.
You're the reason that I hate Nova Scotia.
by Fehr and Balanced on Dec 11, 2009 1:06 PM EST up reply actions
Football wouldn’t accept someone that routinely dives and embellishes being sneezed on? Huh, I guess I missed the memo that started a Tom Brady hatefest.
Now drink with me deeply of the bourbon, scotch, and rye until such time as we are fighting drunk.
by Steckel Me Elmo on Dec 11, 2009 11:37 AM EST up reply actions
For the record I did see the Brady comment (after my post, but I still stand by my statement). He did get lambasted that one week. But that doesn’t explain every other week where he goes down faster than a thai hooker whenever someone comes within two feet of him. He routinely dives and whines at the refs to get the call, and gets it more than any other QB I’ve seen (The New England Angel!).
For the record, I think he was criticized after the Baltimore game when one of the Baltimore players (Lewis?), rightfully, called out Brady for being a sissy.
Now drink with me deeply of the bourbon, scotch, and rye until such time as we are fighting drunk.
by Steckel Me Elmo on Dec 11, 2009 11:43 AM EST up reply actions
Brady (and others) certainly do complain. But does he flop to the ground if somebody touches him? If a lineman gets a hand up on his shoulder, does he grab at his facemask to try to draw a call?
I haven’t seen it happen. If it did, Deadspin would be all over it for days.
Down Goes Brown - Unapologetically nostalgic for the past. Brutally realistic about the present. Grudgingly optimistic about the future.
by Down Goes Brown on Dec 11, 2009 1:36 PM EST up reply actions
No way. James Harrison, beat of a man, gets held on every play and never complains. I clearly remember watching one play where the OT put his hand under the face mask and facepalmed him to block him and Harrison didn’t do a thing. Ridiculous. And NHL player would snap their neck trying to draw that call.
You're the reason that I hate Nova Scotia.
by Fehr and Balanced on Dec 11, 2009 2:44 PM EST up reply actions
Thanks for stopping by, DGB. I love that Ribeiro clip and I’ll hate him forever because of that play. I wish you would have linked to the other Avery dive clip just so I wouldn’t have to agree with Pierre McGuire. You’re completely right that it’s about the players and the league culture accepting this stuff. Anything to draw an advantage right? You also see guys clamping sticks under their arms to draw a hook and snap their heads back for the high stick. It’s all garbage to me but it won’t change until the league gets serious about it. I think ultimately on-ice punishment won’t be enough, the league is going to have to be more aggressive with fines and for serious repeat-offenders, suspensions. Of course, you of all people know how that’s likely to play out. So is the only solution really on the players? If that’s the case I think we’ll see the same “solution” we see with the head shots when we ask players to respect each other more.
You're the reason that I hate Nova Scotia.
by Fehr and Balanced on Dec 11, 2009 1:02 PM EST up reply actions
Anything to draw an advantage right?
Exactly, and that gets to another difference between the NFL and the NHL. In hockey, we know there are certains guys whose job is to try to draw penalties. Maybe not always by diving, but by starting scrums, instigating trouble, and basically trying to get somebody to punch them in the face.
In most sports (or anywhere else in life), those people would be looked down on, and they certainly wouldn’t get their way. They’d be the boy who cried wolf. An NFL WR who had a reputation for diving to draw a PI call wouldn’t get the benefit of the doubt from officials after a while. And rightly so.
But in the NHL, those guys are celebrated. And sometimes it feels like the ref is watching them specifically — “Oh good, here comes Avery/Ruutu/Tootoo/etc., I’m going to get to call a penalty on somebody soon!”
Down Goes Brown - Unapologetically nostalgic for the past. Brutally realistic about the present. Grudgingly optimistic about the future.
by Down Goes Brown on Dec 11, 2009 1:42 PM EST up reply actions
And teams look at those guys as indispensable parts of a winning team. “We need a Claude Lemieux type guy to really take us to the next level.” I hate that crap. I hate that in reality I have to acknowledge that Steve Ott would make the Caps a better team, even though I have no respect for the way the guy plays the game and I think he’s a total degenerate.
You're the reason that I hate Nova Scotia.
by Fehr and Balanced on Dec 11, 2009 2:46 PM EST up reply actions
I’ve always said there needs to be something else done about dives. I wholeheartedly agree that it should be called on its own sometimes. there is no reason another call has to be tied to it. now if they want to call both, like now, that is fine. I just don’t think that should be the only way it is called. I’d even go so far as to say make all dives a double-minor so if you get nicked for it at all, your team still will have to kill it off.
all that said, I’d be fine with it being taken away too since it just something else that the refs have to make rushed judgment calls on in the midst of all the action.
Good analysis. I never understood the position that it is somehow illogical for offsetting tripping/diving penalties to be called. It isn’t.
But I don’t understand your proposed solution. The status quo is an offset. If, as you propose, a dive negates the initial penalty, then are you saying that neither player goes to the box, or just the diver?
I don’t think they should stop calling offsetting penalties, I’d just like to see them encouraged to call diving on its own more often.
I think the coincidental diving call is a total cop out by the officials. It seems to happen when the officials aren’t sure whether it was a penalty or not. Have the guts to make what you think is the right call I say.
I disagreed with you above, but agree with you here. The state of officiating is basically just bad: they’re poorly trained, they’re poorly prepared, and they’re not confident enough to make what seems to be the right call. Nor are they man enough to admit fault later on. I really don’t have a problem with the various leagues protecting their Refs, but I have a problem with the apparent exaltation they have, because they’re treated like Gods among men by the league. They make bad calls, some egregiously so, and there is no recourse for it.
Kozlov’s Goalie Interference 2 years ago against Philly? One of the worst calls I’ve ever seen, and that particular ref (i don’t remember who it was, specifically), was one of the ones advanced to the next round. Ridiculous, the state of officiating today.
Next year, though, I believe is the changeover. Lots of new Refs are coming in, and that should be interesting.
by DrinkingPartner on Dec 11, 2009 11:03 AM EST up reply actions
I agree with a lot of this, but I don’t agree that the refs are poorly trained (maybe given poor guidance by the league) and I don’t agree that there is no recourse for it. Just because punishment is private doesn’t mean it doesn’t happen. The league does evaluate the refs and it’s a big factor in who gets to ref in the playoffs, and continue through the playoffs.
You're the reason that I hate Nova Scotia.
by Fehr and Balanced on Dec 11, 2009 1:11 PM EST up reply actions
maybe given poor guidance by the league
That’s more what I meant. I know these guys work their asses off.
by DrinkingPartner on Dec 11, 2009 3:34 PM EST up reply actions
I feel like I’ve read that somewhere before….
…Rather than being used to dissuade the embarrassing infraction that it seeks to address, the penalty seems to be used by officials to “even-up”…
Hockey players aren't like other people. Witt after being hit by a car:
I’m okay. No big deal...I’ve got to go play some hockey. I’m a hockey player.
Intents (and porpoises)
It seems to me the NHL puts more stock into mind-reading than major sports do. For instance, Ovechkin was tripped in Buffalo. I don’t know whether he was ‘trying to make himself look tripped’, or ‘trying to spin the trip into a quality scoring chance’. Luckily, NHL refs can tell the difference. Same goes for “intent to blow the whistle”. If a guy gets flattened as the whistle blows, why shouldnt that be called as a late hit/unsportsmanlike conduct? It stands to reason that the ref intended to blow the whistle, before actually doing so. And we’ve seen that intent to blow may be substituted for the sound of the whistle in the course of play.
I had a higher tolerance for missed calls and misjudgments when refs were responsible for sight, not insight.
Big difference on the “intent to blow the whistle” on a goal and on a hit. You can’t ask a player to anticipate a whistle before it happens and quit playing. They have to be allowed to go at it until they hear it. The puck being blown dead may be done but the ref is just post hoc saying that in his mind the play was dead so he’s just not counting the result.
You're the reason that I hate Nova Scotia.
by Fehr and Balanced on Dec 11, 2009 1:13 PM EST up reply actions
So ‘intent-to-blow’ stops the scoring (see DET) and the actual whistle stops everything else? To be clear, I was using the ‘late-hit’ scenario as absurd. I find it equally absurd to penalize a guy who’s tripped (that’s against the rules) for falling (that’s not) the wrong way (depends on the ref/day/player/angle/score/time remaining).
It’s a Sears, Roebuck rule, being applied by agents of chaos.
The distinction on the whistle is what action you are addressing. You can’t stop human action until the whistle, so you can’t punish the action until it is actually late. You can ignore the results of a play after the ref “deems the play dead” even if he hasn’t gotten the whistle blown yet. And I think that rule is bullshit also.
MON got boned last night on that rule (yey for my fantasy team). The ref actually starts to point for the goal, stops, then waives it off and says he meant to call the play dead already. Then why the Fuck did you start pointing goal, asshole? You know it was a goal. The video shows it was a goal. But because you did your job poorly and slowly you change the outcome of a game? See you in hell.
You're the reason that I hate Nova Scotia.
by Fehr and Balanced on Dec 11, 2009 2:49 PM EST up reply actions
You seem ambivalent.
Wait, not really, I just…. Could I get an NHL ref over here, please? I can’t read F&B’s mind, and I need to make a call.
PK stats
I know this is completely off topic for this posting but my friends and I are having a discussion on who are best PKers are. I know there is a site that lists the GGA for each player but I cannot remember it. Looking for some help.
Thanks
it doesn’t answer your question ‘zactly, but Mirtle’s Best Defensive Forwards is a good place to start.
Support your local bakery!
by bigonetimer on Dec 11, 2009 12:17 PM EST up reply actions
Diving should notbe penalized by putting a player in the box, but instead by making the player perform some embarrassing act, like appearing in an Eastern Motors commercial.
it does look like a Pepto Bismol commercial, circling the diarrhea.
by DrinkingPartner on Dec 11, 2009 12:29 PM EST up reply actions
I think that, just like fans can see a diving call differently depending on what team their rooting for, diffrent refs can see a diving call differently. Not that they are nessesarily biased, but they are human. Reality is how you percive it, and thats true of all of us. There is a fine line between taking Too much of the refs judgment out of the game and having robot referees.
If you don't wanna get hit, KEEP YOUR HEAD UP!
May be learn from other sports?
I wish NHL will allow coaches to challenge questionable calls and call for video review. Something like in tennis – player can challenge ruling once each set. So if NHL coaches will have the same ability to call for a review once a period and if they were right then they can challenge again. It will keep referees honest, coaches happy and will add some time for commercials that will keep sponsors interested
I kind of like that idea. I mean, NHL games are zippy-fast. It’s not like baseball, when they can get torturous. If a couple challenges took five more minutes per game, big deal.
Something NFL-style might be okay. You get one free challenge. Second challenge costs your team their time out. If BOTH go your way, you can keep the timeout, but either way you get no more challenges, only goal/no-goal and penalty situations, 60-second max review time, on-ice call remains if not clear, no challenge on non-calls, etc.
Or instead of losing the time-out, a second invalid challenge is a 2 minute delay-of-game. This might be too harsh, though, because of the potential 5-on-3 situation.
Caps fan in Minnesota
Line calls
Reviews of ‘in or out’ are far less subjective than ‘trip, dive, or both’. Think of the flubbed video reviews of goals, and tell me how video reviews of dives would be a reliable improvement.
I’d rather go the NFL route and leave the judgment calls on the field but have a publicly available “official review” after the game where the head of league officiating explains why certain calls were made and how they should have been made. But that’s not how the NHL likes to handle their business. Reviewing judgment calls is messy territory, IMO.
You're the reason that I hate Nova Scotia.
by Fehr and Balanced on Dec 11, 2009 1:16 PM EST up reply actions
I’ve long advocated this position on the Rink. This is exactly how the USSF handles pro soccer officiating. Analysis is put up online so that the pro grade officials can learn, but so can the grade 7 and 8 guys that do youth and low level amateur matches can also improve.
Additionally, it tells the fans that the league knows that calls were fucked up. Or it tells fans that the officials actually know what they are doing, which can teach fans the intricacies of the game, since they also explain controversial (or difficult) but correct calls. It doesn’t change the fact that the outcome of the game might have been changed, but it at least inspires some confidence in the system.
Yeah, I definitely don’t think the NHL (or any league) should get into reviewing judgment calls. You think there are complaints about bias now, just wait until we get subjective calls going against a team after being reviewed. Replay has to stick to objective calls.
Of all our iniquities ignorance may be the worst
by Killer_Carlson on Dec 11, 2009 6:05 PM EST up reply actions
There’s no way this would ever work for a penalty call, let alone in the case of embellishment specifically, where two people could watch the same video 20,000 times and have opposite opinions.
I also question each of your last three points. As much as I will sometimes hate refs, I never question their “honesty”. I think coaches would not appreciate the extra pressure on them — much easier to say you disagree with a call during a postgame news conference than explain why you cost your team the game with a dumb “challenge” (and how well can anyone on the bench see something you’d need instant replay to check at the far end of the ice?). Finally, if it would be anything like football, we’d see no added commercials. I don’t think advertisers would be lining up to purchase something so mired with uncertainty.
I’m a big proponent of instant reply in sports, but the replay we have in the NHL is as far as it can logically go.
by sixsevenfiftysix on Dec 11, 2009 2:46 PM EST up reply actions
Do they still have "the list"?
When the NHL’s diving penalty was first created, the league sent around a list of offenders every week and had them posted in all the dressing rooms. The players hated it (because of course they were always innocent — I remember Bryan McCabe having a meltdown over his name being on the first list).
Does anyone know if they still do that? I don’t think they do.
Down Goes Brown - Unapologetically nostalgic for the past. Brutally realistic about the present. Grudgingly optimistic about the future.
by Down Goes Brown on Dec 11, 2009 1:45 PM EST reply actions
I don’t think so because I haven’t heard anything about it and I can’t remember hearing about a guy being fined in years.
I agree with zephyr.
You're the reason that I hate Nova Scotia.
by Fehr and Balanced on Dec 11, 2009 2:52 PM EST up reply actions
have a dive negate any initial infraction
I may be in the minority of people who disagree with this, just because I don’t trust a referee (in any sport) to accurately call diving as far as I can throw them. My guess is we’d see more instances where a player was honestly tripped/whatever and did nothing worse than fall naturally become a PP for the OTHER team than times where an actual diver was punished.
by sixsevenfiftysix on Dec 11, 2009 2:48 PM EST reply actions
but if the ref thinks it’s a dive, then it must not be enough of a whatever-he-was-going-to-call-penalty for it to be penalized. The whole rule is defined poorly.
by DrinkingPartner on Dec 11, 2009 3:46 PM EST up reply actions
You would think, but apparently that’s not true given that 88% of dives are accompanied by opposing penalties as outlined above.
by sixsevenfiftysix on Dec 11, 2009 3:49 PM EST up reply actions
There’s no common sense in the diving rule, and that’s where it fails.
by DrinkingPartner on Dec 11, 2009 4:01 PM EST up reply actions
I'll admit..
that Mike Ribeiro is a diver. He’s a total punk and everyone hates him. But I still love him. He doesn’t get called for half the dives he does.
The way they call diving is a joke.
Dallas Stars 4 Life: Stars Blogging From Hockeyville, Iowa
by Brad_Richards_Rocks on Dec 11, 2009 6:24 PM EST reply actions
Amazing. With that kind of objectivity you’re welcome here anytime. So glad you can admit that. Even though I think it was a bad hit I love everything about Dustin Brown destroying Ribeiro on the boards. From Ribeiro spinning like he’s not on the ice with 5 guys that want to take his head off. To Brown taking his head off. To Morrow challenging Brown. To Brown excepting the challenge and taking it like a man. Awesome all around.
You're the reason that I hate Nova Scotia.
by Fehr and Balanced on Dec 11, 2009 6:39 PM EST up reply actions
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
Related FanPosts on Japers' Rink
Related FanShots on Japers' Rink
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recent FanPosts
FanShots
Quick hits of video, photos, quotes, chats, links and lists that you find around the web.
Recent FanShots
Southeast Standings
| GP | W | L | OTL | PT | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Washington
|
82 | 54 | 15 | 13 | 121 |
|
Atlanta
|
82 | 35 | 34 | 13 | 83 |
|
Carolina
|
82 | 35 | 37 | 10 | 80 |
|
Tampa Bay
|
82 | 34 | 36 | 12 | 80 |
|
Florida
|
82 | 32 | 37 | 13 | 77 |
(updated 4.12.2010 at 9:21 AM EDT)
The Vault
In Association With
Latest Puck Daddy - NHL from Yahoo! Sports
- Trending Topics: Odd arbitration decisions; more NHLers Tweeting
- Ovechkin wins fifth Kharlamov Trophy, talks Talbot
- Puck Headlines: Witt hits waivers; Kovalchuk grievance details set
- Jersey Fouls: Sharks get creatively awful; hockey movie pass/fail
- White, Flames agree to one-year deal; Bruins sign Wheeler
Certain photos copyright © 2010 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
