Hjalmarsson Hit Discussion (2 Game Suspension)

[Pez68]

[quote name="R K"]Pez you feel sorry for who you chose too. When you become a millionare let me know if you notice 40k wrongfully taken from you.



And Biscuit I agree with your previous post 100%.[/quote]



The wrongfully part is certainly debatable... He boarded him, regardless of Jason P's stupidity and fault in that penalty. Everyone is looking at this from entirely the wrong perspective. $40k is a lot of money to me. It is a lot of money to a lot of people. But, when you look at the big picture, the guy is only losing two fucking days of pay off of a fourteen day paycheck. Oh no.....

 

[Guest]

Wait, one more reply and you can have the last word.



Everyone is looking at it entirely wrong but you, yet there are several people completely disagreeing with you. So they are all wrong? Huh?



Again I'd miss 40k, before, during, and after taxes. Shame he has to for a play that most certainly shouldn't have been cause for a suspension. "He hit him to hard". Last I checked that wasn't a penalty it's what they all try to do.



:dance:

 

[Pez68]

You're no fun.



Two days of pay. That's it. :violin:

 

[BiscuitintheBasket]

[quote name="Pez68"]The loss of $800 per month is FAR more substantial than the money Hammer is losing for his two game suspension. Kind of my point. Most people probably wouldn't give two shits about you losing that $800 per month, but the money Hammer is losing because of his two game suspension is somehow a big deal... I just find it funny when people bring up the money that athletes lose by serving suspensions, or by paying fines, like we should feel sorry for them, or care in the least.[/quote]





Keep in mind that I am a silent partner in that business. Which means I threw money towards it, maybe look at a few documents, have a meeting or two...But it is not my normal job. In fact my normal job makes about 1/3 or that silent partner job, which is far more exciting.



That $9600 annual does have an impact on how I deal with my funds. Doesn't break the bank, but I do need to refocus...and I can't just assume that what I make will always be what I make or even for a long period of time.



The funny thing is, we only dislike the ruling. We all know that the impact is not necessarily significant, but it is foolish to think that the loss of money is like dropping a dime on the street...but then again, since most feel that athlete's make their full contract salary and the money is limitless forever, it is easy to have the loss of a dime perspective.

 

[Pez68]

Nice job to have.

 

[MassHavoc]

[quote name="Pez68"]Well, since we're bringing up taxes, it isn't 40k either, since he pays a large amount of his salary towards taxes... Out of pocket, he's probably losing like $15-20k.... [/quote]

Don't you have that backwards? They are taking money that has already had taxes taken out of it, so it would be more like 50k?

 

[FlyChicaga]

$40K could buy a LOT of Ikea furniture. I'd be pissed if I lost $40K. But that's like 75% of my income.



I was pissed when I lost $150 at the blackjack table in Vegas. I'm that cheap though. I could have bought a lot of beer with $150. Like 200 bottles of Labatt Blue from Jewel. Hammer just lost over 53,000 bottles of Labatt Blue. He could have thrown QUITE a party with that money. All because of a dumb decision sent down from Campbell.

 

[jakobeast]

[quote name="FlyChicaga"]$40K could buy a LOT of Ikea furniture. I'd be pissed if I lost $40K. But that's like 75% of my income.



I was pissed when I lost $150 at the blackjack table in Vegas. I'm that cheap though. I could have bought a lot of beer with $150. Like 200 bottles of Labatt Blue from Jewel. Hammer just lost over 53,000 bottles of Labatt Blue. He could have thrown QUITE a party with that money. All because of a dumb decision sent down from Campbell.[/quote]



Finally! Someone put it in terms I can understand!

 

[phranchk]

[quote name="MassHavoc"]

Don't you have that backwards? They are taking money that has already had taxes taken out of it, so it would be more like 50k?[/quote]

No. They are not taking money that had taxes taken out already.

 

[MassHavoc]

[quote name="phranchk"]

No. They are not taking money that had taxes taken out already.[/quote]

Oh? How are they taking pre-tax money? I didn't realize they could do that. I thought only qualified 'vendor' type organizations could do that. Like Transit, FSA, HSA, Retirment funds things of that nature. I didn't think you could just decide who get's your money pre tax?

 

[Guest]

I've been thinking about this hit a lot lately and kind of was wondering, how could JP put himself in a safer position? If he were to do a 180 he would be getting setup for a suicide pass, which would have probably been just as bad. Technically he didn't even have the puck when Hammer hit him, so he wasn't at a position of needed safety quite yet.



Hammer got what he deserved on the check and that's it.

 

[Guest]

[quote name="TJD"]I've been thinking about this hit a lot lately and kind of was wondering, how could JP put himself in a safer position? If he were to do a 180 he would be getting setup for a suicide pass, which would have probably been just as bad. Technically he didn't even have the puck when Hammer hit him, so he wasn't at a position of needed safety quite yet.



Hammer got what he deserved on the check and that's it.[/quote]



Nope. Was a bullshit suspension. Go look at the excuse and tell me how one "hits someone too hard" in the game of hockey. It's not possible. They had NO VALID REASON to suspend him so they "made something up". Yup!

 

[Guest]

[quote name="R K"]



Nope. Was a bullshit suspension. Go look at the excuse and tell me how one "hits someone too hard" in the game of hockey. It's not possible. They had NO VALID REASON to suspend him so they "made something up". Yup![/quote]



The reason they gave him was bullshit, but how about the fact that he hit a player from behind, head first into the board, who did not have the puck in his possession?

 

[Guest]

[quote name="TJD"]



The reason they gave him was bullshit, but how about the fact that he hit a player from behind, head first into the board, who did not have the puck in his possession?[/quote]





1. It was NOT from behind, look again. Shoulder to Shoulder HAD POMMY not Crouched down after he saw him.



2. Head first was the "REACTION" of the hit. He did not hit him in the head, but the recoil of the hit sent his head into the GLASS. Not Plexi Glass, Seemless, no move GLASS. Like at the Edge.



3. Pomminville looked at him twice. Did nothing to avoid it.



4. If you notice the puck is there the instant he hits him. Hjarlmarsson was making a Hockey play, and PLAYING the Puck.



5. Pominville did NOT have his helmet strap tight. That along with the his head hitting the glass, is what caused the concussion.



Penalty maybe, although I'm not sure it fits ANY criteria. Suspension, No Way!

 

[Maiden]

[quote name="R K"]





1. It was NOT from behind, look again. Shoulder to Shoulder HAD POMMY not Crouched down after he saw him.



2. Head first was the "REACTION" of the hit. He did not hit him in the head, but the recoil of the hit sent his head into the GLASS. Not Plexi Glass, Seemless, no move GLASS. Like at the Edge.



3. Pomminville looked at him twice. Did nothing to avoid it.



4. If you notice the puck is there the instant he hits him. Hjarlmarsson was making a Hockey play, and PLAYING the Puck.



5. Pominville did NOT have his helmet strap tight. That along with the his head hitting the glass, is what caused the concussion.



Penalty maybe, although I'm not sure it fits ANY criteria. Suspension, No Way![/quote]



It shouldn't have been a penalty and without the penalty there would have been no suspension. Simple as that.

 

[BigPete]

[quote name="R K"]My problem is the fact he's losing money for doing something that wasn't wrong.



Will he notice the 40k, I would. I'd be pretty pissed off about it too.



And yes I think they get paid Bi Weekly. Although his check will be minus 40k.



Wonder if he can write that off for charity. I mean that's where it ultimately is supposed to go.[/quote]

I believe it goes to the NHLPA fund for injured, retired, destotue cases which sounds an aweful lot like a charity to me. So, this may be a little less painful as he should definately be able to write it off his taxes. Plus his total earnings would come down. So aside from not having the 40k in cash, it kind of evens out overall from a financial stand point (or so I assume).

 

[BiscuitintheBasket]

[quote name="Maiden"]



It shouldn't have been a penalty and without the penalty there would have been no suspension. Simple as that.[/quote]





By rule it is a penalty, by normal play in the NHL for quite some time it has not been or expected to have a call. Welcome to the New New-NHL where injuries just might draw a major 9 times out of 10. Just wonder if they will be consistent with that call...