View Single Post
Old
06-29-2011, 10:23 PM
  #22
Tootoo
Registered User
 
Tootoo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Wisconsin
Country: United States
Posts: 45
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by OpenWheel View Post
On this forum I must have heard at least every other game last season that Hornqvist was being abused, fouled, yet nobody would stick up for him. He's not a star but if we hope for goals it would be good to help him and maybe others out. We don't want Hornqvist to quit driving the net because he's tired of getting blows to the face or cross-checked. Seems like officials miraculously get better eyesight, see more of the fouls, once teams take exception on the ice. Or maybe that's my imagination. They sure seemed to miss a lot last season.

But no, we don't need an enforcer to come out for a few minutes a game to fight the other enforcer. That's just stupid. It's ok for the fans if teams can afford to waste the ice time, but it's useless as a way to 'enforce' anything.

A tough who could play enough minutes once in awhile so they could go after the actual fouler at the time of the foul, (or on their next shift) would be good. SOB could do it, but doesn't. Tootoo and Weber are still our main guys who will go, and Weber going is a terrible idea because that fits the other teams plan of getting him off the ice, plus some added chance of injury. Wouldn't mind another tough forward besides Tootoo. (Wilson would've probably started in the playofs if he had that type of thing in him...)

So overall, yeah I say a tough guy would be good, if he can play. He's out there to go punch the fouler, not the other tough. A tough guy who can't play would be bad, because Trotz would play him anyway.
Completely agree.

ThirdManIn, I thought by the first sentence in your post you were saying we need to sign a star before we think of signing an enforcer, rather then saying that no one really needs protecting at the moment.

Tootoo is offline   Reply With Quote