B/R NHL Staff Roundtable: Did Leon Draisaitl Deserve a Suspension? (2024)

The main storyline from the first two games of the Stanley Cup Final is that the Florida Panthers are up 2-0 in the series.

The secondary storyline after Monday night's game is whether Leon Draisaitl deserves supplementary discipline after delivering a check to the head of Aleksander Barkov during the third period of Game 2.

Draisaitl was assessed a two-minute minor for roughing, while Barkov left the game and didn't return. The Panthers captain wasn't held out as a precaution, according to head coach Paul Maurice, and his status for Game 3 and the rest of the series is up in the air.

The NHL will not give Draistatl any supplemental discipline despite the apparent injury to Barkov.

So, did Draisaitl deserve to be suspended? Our NHL staff weighed in here.

This is going to hurt me more than it hurts you.

For those unaware, I'm an Edmonton Oilers fan. It's been that way since I was nine. To the point where I have a son named Ryan (for Ryan Smyth) and a dog named Stanley (for, well...you know). I had to keep myself from hyperventilating after Game 2 when I shared an elevator with Mark Messier, whose jersey has hung in my closet since the Reagan administration.

The last thing in the world I want to see is Draisaitl suspended for Game 3 or Game 4, or anything else that's going to make an already difficult job even more so.

But that doesn't mean I didn't see what unfolded on Monday night, which was Draisaitl, obviously frustrated after five-plus periods of competitive invisibility, taking a bald-faced run at Barkov along the offensive zone boards.

The fan in me understands the motivation. Draisaitl and Co. had a hard time generating anything worthwhile in Game 2. They saw chance after chance dissolve after one too many passes were misfired or steered away by what had to feel like a roster full of bodies wielding 10-foot sticks.

My 1970s-reared side appreciates the idea that he wanted to lay a hard lick on a source of his angst and perhaps send a message that getting the last two wins in the series wasn't going to feel quite as easy as getting the first two had been.

Still, there's a line between physical hockey and unnecessary nonsense. And by leaving his feet to deliver an elbow to Barkov's vulnerable jaw, he jumped it.

Call it unsportsmanlike. Call it intent to injure. Call it whatever you'd like. Regardless, it deserves a suspension.

- Lyle Fitzsimmons

In no way am I in favor of hits to the head or injuring an opponent. Hockey is a physical game and injuries will happen, intentional or not.

With that being said, let me get into why Draisaitl shouldn't be suspended.

If all things were equal and the officiating throughout the postseason had been consistent, Draisaitl arguably should get suspended. He made contact with an opponent's head with a nasty elbow after leaving his feet.

The issue is that incidents throughout the postseason have yet to be judged consistently.

In the second round, Sam Bennett was not suspended after his headshot to Brad Marchand. Marchand missed time due to a concussion, but no supplemental discipline was handed down. No suspension.

Ryan Lomberg delivered a check to the head of Jimmy Vesey in the Eastern Conference Final that knocked out the Rangers' winger for the rest of the series. No suspension.

If those hits didn't merit a suspension, why would Draisaitl's hit on Barkov be worthy of one?

Unless these hits are adjudicated consistently, there's always going to be discussion and controversy surrounding them. And it's going to give license for players to cross the line and try to get away with it. Heck, Marchand even admitted that teams try to injure players at times.

Without consistency from the Department of Player Safety to regulate hits like Draisaitl's on Barkov, it's hard to make the case that he should be suspended.

- Lucky Ngamwajasat

Unfortunately, double standards are a way of life. But come ride with me for a moment to the world of hypotheticals.

It's late in a game where the Oilers have a 3-1 lead on the Panthers, and Panthers superstar Aaron Ekblad leaves his feet to lay a hit on Oilers captain Connor McDavid. In the process, he leads with his elbow and connects directly with McDavid's head, sending him off the ice injured.

You can see the news cycle and half of Canada erupting from here as everyone rallies to have Ekblad suspended for the rest of the series and into the 2024-25 regular season for such a heinous act. And it would be deserved, too. A harsh punishment would be well-earned.

I'm not going to insult you by asking, "What's the difference between McDavid and Barkov," because there's obviously a difference. But in the scope of the teams, roles, and usage of the players, there isn't a difference. Barkov is the Panthers' captain, and his role, on top of driving their top line to generate offense, is to lead the way in shutting down the Oilers' top scorers...which he's helped do effectively through two games.

You cannot argue that Draisaitl was just trying to lay a regular hit. He was trying to lay a huge hit on the Panthers' best player, who has kept hhim and his teammates off the board through two games, and he accomplished that goal. He also did it in slimy fashion by leaving his feet and leading with his forearm. Draisaitl probably wanted to hit Barkov high, even if he didn't mean to hit him in the head.

But he did. And that's what happens when players get reckless and look to send a message of sorts.

If you throw the playoff version of the book at Draisaitl, it's rather inarguable to do so. The old equation is one playoff game equals two regular-season games. A one-game suspension checks out for a guy without a history.

But if the NHL lets it go with a slap on the wrist (or nothing at all), that may essentially make it open season on anyone, star or otherwise. That's not the standard the league should be looking to set.

- Joe Yerdon

When asked about his feelings on Draisaitl's elbow, Panthers head coach Paul Maurice said, "This isn't The Oprah Winfrey Show."

I believe—or maybe I hope—he was saying this to imply my biggest gripe with NHL officiating: His feelings on the play shouldn't matter.

There should be specific, consistent rules in a rulebook. These rules shouldn't change based on who is winning, what time it is during the game, whether it's the playoffs or not, whether or not the penalty drawer gets injured enough, or due to any of our feelings.

So many of these "should he get suspended or shouldn't he" debates fall existentially flat for me because we don't yet have that. You see it immediately in the nature of the current conversation: There's much ado about star-on-star crime. 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 specific play at hand.

Now, the specific play in question doesn't feel clean to me. You've got the perpetrator leading with his elbow, leaving his feet, and intending to crush Barkov along the boards. Said perpetrator was penalized, as he should've been.

How much further should the league take it? That's where it's impossible for me to say until the concept of "roughing" becomes less ambiguous, especially during the playoffs.

This isn't The Oprah Winfrey Show, but I wish it weren't Judge Judy either.

- Sara Civian