View Single Post
08-02-2005, 12:07 AM
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Los Angeles
Country: Italy
Posts: 1,796
vCash: 500
Originally Posted by Matt13
I love the enforcer debate.

Do they deter injuries, well I dont think a study has ever been done so I wont say they surely do or dont. IMO, they do.

I always point back to two games at Staples Center in particular where the Kings not dressing enforcers cost us games. The first game was against Boston. The Kings had a commanding 3 goal lead. Sandy McCarthy took the ice, hit everything in site and scored a goal. The Kings ended up losing that game. The other game I like to point out was the Toronto game. Again we had 3 goal lead and lost it because Domi and Belak stepped up the hitting and a physicaly tough team took over the game.

Now, Andy Murray was the home coach in both of those games. He saw the roster for the other team, and finalized his. He must have realized that Boston had big guys like Thornton, Gill, McCarthy etc and he had Pirnes, Pallfy and Stumpel or against Toronto realized again the same scenario. Both times he excluded any Heavyweights. In those games, Lappy fought Boynton from Boston and Avery fought McCabe while Lappy fought Roberts for Toronto. Now with our "toughest" guys in the line up fighting nobodys the other team still had huge size and toughness advantages over us. Which is why you can say that Andy Murray does not like dressing enforcers.

I truely believe that if Brennan had suited up for the game against Boston that he could have taken the ice while McCarthy was out there, fought and stopped the momentum swing from happening at that point.

I also like to point out two games last season where enforcers where dressed and we played teams that far outmatched us and we won. Philidelphia at Staples, Norton and Brennan dressed. Brennan threw the smack down on a Phili and Norton played huggy with Brashear. We won that game. Colorado, Brennan threw the smack down on Cummins, we won.

Now you can have an opinion there may have been other factors, but the fact we lost 3 goal leads without them and won games with them shows there may be something to the formula.

My main reason for wanting an enforcer dressed when the other team dresses one isnt because I expect him to win everygame. The only thing I expect is when the other teams guy goes out there and starts taking liberties, that our guy goes out there and gets him off the ice. Plain and simple. The other teams players can not hurt our skill guys from the box.

You can not name a team that does not use an enforcer, or somebody that can go toe to toe with a big guy. If you can its an anomoly and not the norm. During the most recent playoffs, Calgary dressed Oliwa on a regular basis while Tampa Bay dress Roy and Dingman and these are two teams that are already very tough. The Kings were not tough nor did they dress an enforcer and the season from hell took place.

Please do not argue that all of Averys PIM's make him a legit tough guy. He fought because he had to. No one else on the team was taking on the guys taking liberties. Avery also was very stupid in a few games (PHX) and racked them up that way. There is no reason for Sean Avery, 5'9", being our teams toughguy. There is no reason he should lead the league in PIMS either.

Also dont any of you like flowers? Its spelled "pansy". It starts with a "p" and ends with a "y", like "p*ssy" or "palffy". Our lack of team toughness last season dictated that we should have dressed an enforcer on a regular basis.
The best post i've read all year!

You'll still get some of the posters here arguing it. So a message to the "negative eddie's" on the enforcer subject. Read this about ten times, and maybe some light will shed itself!

swinginutter* is offline