Todd Bertuzzi’s name is defended by a fellow hockey “enforcer”. Why?

One of the consistent themes I have tried to stress here at VLM is that part of being a fan, including being a Maple Leaf fan, is that while we all share a passion for the team (and many of us also have an appreciation for the franchise’s history and legacy as well) it’s important that, when we discuss any issue relating to the team or hockey in general, we are respectful to one another—even when our opinions part ways.

Normally I will listen to any point of view that is well considered and thoughtfully presented here, even if I may vehemently disagree with the view put forward.  Comments that differ from my point of view are always posted here, as long as they rise to the above level of discussion:  mutual respect.

I will of course maintain that posture with anyone who would like to add their thoughts on what I am writing about today, but let me fore-mention that I am pretty inflexible on the subject:  in short, I am stunned by the comments attributed this week to former Colorado Avalanche forward Scott Parker.

To be honest, Parker’s career doesn’t resonate much with me.  If I hadn't stumbled across the article I will refer to, I wouldn't really know who he is.  (That may make me an un-informed hockey "fan", but so be it.  I'm guessing there are hockey fans in Colorado who don't know who our "enforcers" are.)  While the Avs were a fine team during most of Parker's tenure and his “enforcer” role is an important one on most any team, he’s just not the kind of player I would have paid much attention to.  He scored 7 goals in a 10-year NHL career as a 240-pound tough-guy winger.

He “won” a Cup with the Avalanche in 2001, though he played in only 4 games in the playoffs, averaging 2 minutes a game.  So while I’m sure his teammates would say he was integral to their success as their regular-season  “protector”,  I don't know enough about his play to assess his contributions.

I don't doubt he was “good” at his job, as are “enforcers” who, according to the way the game is played, keep the other team “honest”- in the hockey parlance.  But I’m more of the kind of fan who admires what I consider true toughness.  Not the guys who just fight to fight, but tough guys who can do that if necessary, sure, but who also play hard along the boards, in the corners and in front of the net—and play real minutes.  Players who can deliver good, clean hits and play hard all over the ice like, say,  Bob Gainey or Bob Nystrom did in their era, players of that ilk.  You know, NHL’ers who can hit but also score a few goals, who can make plays and are hard to play against.

In Maple Leaf history, I think of a Bert Olmstead, as tough a player as there ever was but who was a lot more than a fighter.  I think of long-time captain George Armstrong, who fought for every inch of ice but usually did it within the rules.  (That's Armstrong at left in the spring of 1963, pictured with a very young Dave Keon, after a Stanley Cup victory.) I have fond memories of many such Leafs through the years, including, for example, Brian Spencer, Scott Garland and in more recent times, Gary Roberts.  Guys who could fight, yes, but brought a lot more than that and who played between the whistles.

In any event, I came across a link to an Avalanche site (Mile High Hockey), an excellent blog which featured an interview with Parker this week.  It’s a fine article, well-written.  All very interesting stuff, as most any open-ended interview is when the subject is known and speaks candidly.

So while it was a revealing “interview” and certainly an interesting article to read, what I found disturbing are some of the comments attributed to Parker, where, as I interpreted it, he absolutely and unequivocally defends Bertuzzi’s violent attack on Steve Moore in a game in Vancouver back in 2004.

Now, we all understand the supposed “code” (here we go again with codes) that tough guys, just as they "defend" their teammates on the ice, defend one another in public—evidently because they have a difficult job to do and only they can really understand one another. I sort of get that, but only to a point.

But you don’t have to go far to read between the lines that he seems to be suggesting that Moore (his former teammate with Colorado) deserved what he got.  Parker is quoted as saying that Moore went to Harvard, “and always thought he was better than everybody else…”.  Parker went on to say, “I never went to college, but I can kick your ass. I’ll bring you right down to my level if you want.  I’ll hit you about four times in the skull and I’ll bring you right down…”.

Wow.  It actually gets worse from there.  (He actually suggests Bertuzzi tried to cushion the blow that Moore received from Bertuzzi…really??)  So I guess the age-old attitude still lives in some people who seem to resent or envy “intelligence” or what they perceive as someone who they (the critic) believe (the guy they don't like) "thinks" he's smarter than other people.  This kind of attitude seems to be, "don’t walk around like you think you're smart, fella, or I’ll punch your lights out...". 

It’s OK to walk around and be a tough hockey guy, I guess, but God forbid we have an intelligent athlete in the NHL.  Who wants that?  And before you say, “Michael, this has nothing to do with Moore being a smart guy, or being educated, it’s because he hit Naslund in an earlier game with a questionable hit…”…listen to what Parker is really saying.  Read the words.  C’mon.  We all know what’s he means.  Heck, he says it.

This is not, to me, what life—or hockey—is supposed to be about.

Maybe next, we’ll hear that this piece is recommended reading for young people.  What an example of advanced thinking, eh?

But don't go by what I am saying.  I recommend that you read the piece, highlighted above.  Look, Parker may be a “nice” guy, a good family man and a wonderful teammate in his playing days.  I have no idea and I certainly have no insight about those things.  But the world is full of “nice” people who hold views on particular subjects that others find sickening.  Sometimes people are held to account in some type of public forum when they express such views, but I’m guessing this will simply pass because, hey, Parker was an NHL tough guy.  And yes, we, thankfully, live in a free society and individuals are allowed to express themselves, as they should be.

But I, for one, found his reported comments around Bertuzzi revealing, disturbing and quite frankly, beyond unacceptable.  I have no issue with a guy standing up for a friend who has fallen on hard times.  I get that.  Maybe that's what Parker was trying to do.

The real discussion point, though, is that we’re talking about a guy (Moore) whose entire life was changed forever because Bertuzzi apparently felt the need to “pay Moore back” from an earlier hit on Naslund—again, the “code”.  In this discussion, it is important to note that what Bertuzzi did was after Moore had already fought a Canuck to try and, presumably, "do what he had to do" after the Naslund hit, and “deal” with the anger that had bubbled up in the Vancouver organization. (Wasn't there a Canuck player who used the term "bounty" before the infamous game?  What does that tells us?)

So here we are in 2012.  We’re trying (yet again) to get away from violence in the game.  We want to get away from hitting from behind (Bertuzzi’s hit was certainly that, though it was much more than a “hit”). Millions of dollars are quite rightly being spent on research into concussions.  Ex-players are suing the leagues they played in.  All leagues are finally punishing (though still  relatively lightly) hits that cause these concussions and what now are proven to be long-term  health issues.   (Bertuzzi’s hit caused more than a concussion- it was much worse than that…).  We’re trying to rid hockey of extreme, “illegal” violence. (Bertuzzi’s actions were certainly that).  Surely, we are trying to send a message to young people and young athletes?  What was Betuzzi’s message?  What was the NHL's in 2004?  What is Parker’s now?

I mean, most of us appreciate hard-hitting, rugged, tough play in hockey players.  But what Bertuzzi did?  Someone is defending that?  Really?  What did that have to do with hockey?

Not that Parker, based on his enlightened public comments, would likely care much for criticism from someone like myself.  I, of course, never played the game (dare I mention that I received a “college education” many, many years ago?) so what could I possibly know?  Perhaps his response would be to give me four blows to the head, to re-arrange my IQ—and my thinking so I could better understand why Bertuzzi is such a swell guy, and why we should all understand why he did what he did to Moore—and how poor Todd got a bum rap. Maybe after those blows to the head, I could see the world the way Parker does, eh?

Those who have read my position on Bertuzzi in the past know I feel strongly that the NHL really glossed over what he did.  Because of the lockout season, he actually missed precious little time in the end as a result of his suspension.  Hell, what Raffi Torres did this past playoff year was tame compared with Bertuzzi’s beyond-flagrant act of obvious and vigilante-style retribution. At least you could argue that Torres was engaged in a "hockey play".  It was a big-time hit.  His mistake was that it was a late hit, and perceived to be a "head shot".  Bertuzzi's actions were in a league of their own.

Yet we all just want to walk away from the truth.  It's way too uncomfortable.  We want to forget that this guy was “rewarded” by being named to Team Canada after his actions against Moore, welcomed with open arms, in fact.  That he has continued to earn millions in a league that looked the other way.  The Avalanche looked the other way, too.  The league sure did.  We all did, as hockey fans.  Who cares about Steve Moore, right?

That Moore went to Harvard makes him a bad guy somehow?  Interesting standard.  Moore apparently had an ego, according to Parker.  How dare Moore think he’s “smart”- if that's indeed what the accusation from Parker was?  Of course, name me an NHL player that doesn’t think he’s “good” at something?  Many of them seemingly think they’re better than everyone else, including off the ice.  It is a life of privilege these players lead.  But a hit on Naslund necessitated what Bertuzzi did?

I have had no respect or regard for the people in charge of the NHL at the time, or of the Canuck organization at the time, since that day—nor for Bertuzzi.

But to hear this kind of garbage from a 7-goal NHL’er, almost a decade after the fact, in the environment that we're in, the societal climate that Parker must be aware of, is beyond shocking to me.

We often complain that athletes don’t say what they really mean.  Well, Parker sure said what he meant.

Too bad it’s about the dumbest thing I’ve heard in the more than 50 years I’ve been following hockey.