Everybody seems tired of George Parros except for the people that need to be tired of him

George Parros is mostly doing what the NHL's top decision-makers want, and that is all that matters to them.

The NHL has a tendency to get in its own way and ruin what could be, and should be, a highly entertaining and successful product.

The talent level in the league is off the charts right now.

They finally got back in the Olympics and showed everybody how good the sport can be when it is played with skill.

But the dinosaurs in charge will find a way to screw things up and fail to capitalize on all of it. I know this is true because this is what they always do. Nowhere is this more evident than with the Department of Player Safety, which continues to be a detriment to the league and fail to do the one thing that is literally in its title — protect the safety of its players.

Especially its star players.

That department is again the focal point of criticism after some truly staggering decisions over the past few days, and there seems to be a growing chorus of anger from people within the league.

It is just not the right people that need to be mad about it when it comes to creating a change.

The two big plays that garnered the most attention recently involved Boston Bruins defenseman Charlie McAvoy for delivering a hit to the head of San Jose Sharks forward Kiefer Sherwood, and Anaheim Ducks defenseman Radko Gudas ending the season of Toronto Maple Leafs superstar Auston Matthews with a blatant knee-on-knee hit.

McAvoy received no punishment.

Gudas was given a five-game suspension, which still seemed to be woefully short of what the situation required given all of the circumstances involved. While it is still more games than I would have guessed in the immediate aftermath, it was still an appalling decision to not even call him in for an in-person hearing that could have resulted in a suspension of more than five games.

It is not just about the hit itself. It is not just about the player that received the hit and the injury that resulted from it.

It is about all of that, along with the player delivering the hit and that player’s history of reckless play.

Gudas is one of the most habitual repeat offenders in the NHL when it comes to crossing the line, having already been suspended four times prior to this in his career. Those four previous suspensions resulted in 21 total games missed, including a 10-game suspension for a slash. The man has a tendency to be a menace on the ice, and in this instance he ended the season of one of the league’s best players.

That situation simply demands a severe punishment.

Five games is not a severe punishment.

In my past discussions with people that have worked in the Department of Player Safety, the process has always been explained to me like this when it comes to potential discipline.

1. Is this play worthy of supplemental discipline? This is the first and most important question. The names of the players involved, the history of the player delivering the hit, and the result of the play (injury or not) are not considered at this stage. It is just two nameless, gray faces where the play itself is the only thing examined. This is done to make sure it is fair to players so they do not feel like they are being targeted by the league, and so their reputation does not influence the decision to suspend or not. If the answer to the question is “no, this play is not worthy of supplemental discipline,” then nothing happens and everybody moves on.

2. If the answer to that question is yes, that is when the variables of a player’s history, as well as a potential injury, come into the equation. The history of the player has a significant role in the severity of the punishment.

Given all of that, the NHL obviously decided McAvoy’s hit on Sherwood was not worthy of a suspension. That means the fact he has been suspended on two previous occasions for hits to the head never became a part of the discussion. They feel it was not a suspension-worthy hit, and that is all that matters.

Gudas’ hit on Matthews obviously did rise to that level, and there is no question that his history and the injury played some role in the suspension. I just don’t think it played enough of a role.

Let’s talk about all of that, as well as the department itself, a little more.