Does Leon Draisaitl deserve a ban?

The main story from the first two games of the Stanley Cup Final is that the Florida Panthers lead the series 2-0.

The second storyline following Monday night’s game is whether Leon Draisaitl deserves additional disciplinary action after throwing a check to Aleksander Barkov’s head in the third period of Game 2.

Draisaitl received a two-minute roughness penalty, while Barkov left the game and did not return. The Panthers captain was not put on the field as a precaution, according to head coach Paul Maurice, and his status for Game 3 and the rest of the series is uncertain.

The NHL will not impose any additional disciplinary action against Draistatl despite Barkov’s apparent injury.

Did Draisaitl deserve the suspension? Our NHL staff gave their opinion.

This will hurt me more than you.

For those of you who don’t know, I’m an Edmonton Oilers fan. I’ve been since I was nine. I even have a son named Ryan (after Ryan Smyth) and a dog named Stanley (after, well… you know). I had to force myself not to hyperventilate after Game 2 when I shared an elevator with Mark Messier, whose jersey has been hanging in my closet since the Reagan administration.

The last thing in the world I want to see is Draisaitl suspended for Game 3 or 4 or anything else that makes an already difficult task even more difficult.

But that doesn’t mean I didn’t see what happened Monday night: Draisaitl, obviously frustrated after more than five periods of invisibility in the competition, launched a blatant attack on Barkov along the attack zone boards.

The fan in me understands the motivation. Draisaitl and Co. struggled to produce anything meaningful in Game 2, watching one chance after another evaporate after too many passes went astray or were distracted by a team that felt like a squad full of guys with 10-foot sticks.

My crew, growing up in the 1970s, can understand the idea that he wanted to end a source of his fear and perhaps send the message that the last two wins in the series were not going to be quite as easy as the first two.

Still, there is a line between physical hockey and unnecessary nonsense, and by leaving his feet to elbow Barkov’s tender jaw, he crossed that line.

Call it unsportsmanlike conduct. Call it intent to injure. Call it whatever you want. Either way, it deserves a suspension.

– Lyle Fitzsimmons

I am definitely not advocating hitting someone in the head or trying to hurt an opponent. Hockey is a physical sport and injuries will happen, whether intentional or not.

Against this background, I would now like to explain why Draisaitl should not be suspended.

If all other things were equal and the refereeing had been consistent throughout the postseason, Draisaitl would likely be suspended. He connected with an opponent’s head with a nasty elbow after leaving his feet.

The problem is that incidents during the postseason have not yet been judged uniformly.

In the second round, Sam Bennett was not suspended after shooting Brad Marchand in the head. Marchand missed time with a concussion, but no additional discipline was imposed. No suspension.

Ryan Lomberg threw a check to Jimmy Vesey’s head in the Eastern Conference finals that put the Rangers winger out of action for the rest of the series. No suspension.

If those punches didn’t warrant a suspension, why would Draisaitl’s punch against Barkov warrant a suspension?

If these hits are not consistently punished, there will always be debate and controversy about it. And it gives players permission to push the boundaries and try to get away with it. Marchand has even admitted that teams sometimes try to injure players.

Since the Player Safety Department does not consistently enforce strikes like the one Draisaitl delivered to Barkov, it is difficult to find a justification for his suspension.

– Happy Ngamwajasat

Unfortunately, double standards and double standards are a way of life. But come with me for a moment into the world of hypotheses.

It’s late in a game where the Oilers are leading the Panthers 3-1, and Panthers superstar Aaron Ekblad gets off his feet to strike Oilers captain Connor McDavid, leading with his elbow and hitting McDavid squarely in the head, sending him off the ice injured.

From here you can see the news and half of Canada in an uproar as everyone advocates for Ekblad to be suspended for the remainder of the series and into the 2024-25 regular season for such a heinous act. And it would be deserved. A harsh punishment would be well deserved.

I won’t insult you by asking, “What’s the difference between McDavid and Barkov?” because there is obviously a difference. But as far as teams, roles and player usage go, there is no difference. Barkov is the Panthers’ captain and his role is not only to power their first line of attack, but also to shut down the Oilers’ top scorers… which he has successfully done in two games.

There’s no denying that Draisaitl just wanted to land a normal shot. He wanted to land a huge blow on the Panthers’ best player, who had kept him and his teammates off the board for two games, and he accomplished that goal. He also did it in a slimy way, leaving his feet and leading with his forearm. Draisaitl probably wanted to hit Barkov high, even if he didn’t want to hit him in the head.

But he did. And that’s what happens when players get reckless and try to send a message.

If you put the playoff version of the book in Draisaitl’s hands, it’s pretty undeniable. The old equation is one playoff game equals two regular season games. A one-game suspension is fine for a player with no history.

But if the NHL lets it slide with a slap on the wrist (or not at all), it could essentially mean that anyone, star or not, is on the prowl. That’s not the standard the league should be setting.

– Joe Yerdon

When asked about his feelings about Draisaitl’s elbow, Panthers coach Paul Maurice said: “That’s not The Oprah Winfrey Show.”

I think – or maybe I hope – that he was trying to address my biggest complaint about NHL referees: his feelings during the game should not Object.

There should be concrete, consistent rules in a set of rules. Those rules shouldn’t change based on who’s winning, how late it is in the game, whether it’s playoffs or not, whether the offender gets hurt enough times, or based on our feelings.

A lot of these “should he be suspended or not” debates are existentially ineffective to me because we don’t have that yet. You can see it immediately in the nature of the current discussion: There’s a lot of fuss about star-on-star crimes. It shouldn’t matter if it’s Draisaitl, Barkov, a Black Ace or Tom Wilson: The rule should be the rule and it should apply to the game at hand.

Well, the specific play in question doesn’t seem clean to me. The offender goes elbow first, lets go of his feet and intends to crush Barkov against the boards. The offender in question was punished, as he should be.

How far should the league go? I can’t say until the term “roughing” becomes clearer, especially during the playoffs.

This is not The Oprah Winfrey Showbut I wish it wasn’t so Judge Judy either.

– Sara Civian