And it's more likely the hundred other things puts them out than the handful of players that get scared off. So, yeah, 10 points is probably still worth more than a negligible difference. At best it breaks even and the injury risk is still stupidly high because the league is awful.
What Staal did was ****, it looked bad and a player like that shouldn't feel comfortable doing that. Players are still cross checking, slashing, ****ing wrestling and elbowing all over the ice. Staal and his ilk being turned off might feel good but it's not doing anything in the grand scheme of things.
It's funny when I hear people talk about the Pens managing Crosby and Malkin's minutes over the year to keep them fresh for the playoffs but then dismiss the impact of reducing the physical toll they take during those minutes over the course of a season.
If they have to fight less, that helps. If they take fewer targeted cross-checks and punches to the face, that helps. And if guys like Dubinsky and Staal don't stop, it'll help that we have one player who will inflict punishment to them and/or their stars in kind.
The dirty play and potential injury still happened, and I think part of Malkin answering it was him being pissed. Reaves addressing it doesn't be necessarily mean Malkin's reaction goes away. Reaves handling one thing and potentially getting thrown out because it's the god damn NHL doesn't mean Malkin isn't still, well, Malkin.
You're essentially making an argument against yourself here.
We don't
know how Reaves addressing it would affect Malkin's reaction, but we do
know how Malkin reacts when there is no Reaves. He makes dirty hits and then has to answer for them. There's at least potential for the situation to play out differently if we have someone else to step up.
I'm all for seeing how Reaves addresses it, because it's better than doing absolutely nothing and expecting things to turn out differently.