HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > NHL Western Conference > Pacific Division > Vancouver Canucks
Mobile Hockey's Future Become a Sponsor Site Rules Support Forum vBookie Page 2
Notices

TRADE[FLA/VAN] Andrew Peters for Darcy Hordichuk

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
10-08-2010, 11:54 AM
  #201
Connecticut
Registered User
 
Connecticut's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Chicago
Posts: 1,774
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by LostMyGlasses View Post
"beer league level goon" implies that his "goon" ability is "beer level".

That is absolute nonsense, MacIntyre has enough skill to be in 20-25 other rosters.
Please. McIntyre has scored 10 points across the AHL/NHL in 151 games since 2007. He has zero skill. If he didn't bring fighting to the table he would probably not crack a single AHL roster. Now there's an argument to be made about whether or not there's value in the fact that he's one of the league's most intimidating fighters, but let's not pretend that he's anything but a goon, and that his skill level is absolutely beer league.

Connecticut is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-08-2010, 11:59 AM
  #202
Mr. Canucklehead
Mod Supervisor
Kitimat Canuck
 
Mr. Canucklehead's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Kitimat, BC
Country: Canada
Posts: 24,110
vCash: 500
MS raises some excellent points. More often than not, cheapshots aren't laid out by other teams' goons. They really are there for your staged fights.

I think most punks/agitators out there can be dealt with by the likes of a Rypien or Glass or Desbiens. IF it becomes a huge issue with a guy like MacIntyre or Ivanans taking liberties, we can call Peters up. But I don't see it getting that far.

Rypien did a decent job defending his teammates last year. I recall specifically Cam Janssen wailing on Tanner Glass in St. Louis and doing a pompous little celebratory act afterward. Next game, Rypien goes after him and breaks his face. I was cheering loudly over that one.

Bottom line, is I understand the need for fighters. But they need to be able to play hockey as well, or be on a two-way contract to the AHL so they're not taking up permanent residence on the team.

Mr. Canucklehead is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-08-2010, 12:08 PM
  #203
orcatown
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Posts: 7,718
vCash: 500
This is naive nonsense.

You think that it defies common sense to say other teams take advantage of you if you have no deterrence. Hordichuk has says he intends to go after the Sedins and may well end up fighting Glass.

The fact that Ivanins bloodied up Paavarri was evidence that the Edmonton's younger players could be targets. Macintyre fight was crucial because it illustrates he is there to protect those youngster. He exactly played that role.

But who are the Canuck going to turn to if it becomes obvious that Belak, or Orr, or MacIntryre, or Janssesn, or Koci or any number of people including Hordichuk decide to go after our defense or better players? Basically we are left, using your logic, hoping they don't or turning the other cheek. (and if this is done you can kiss goodbye to your chances for the Stanley Cup)

And who cares if Peters plays five minutes - that's all the other enforcers play. Or who cares that Peters can't play. Do you think MacIntyre can play or Koci or any of the other enforcers can. Everyone knows they are not there to play and the fact that none of them can play negates this as an argument against Peters. If the other team is going to put a goon on the bench for a few minutes what's the big disadvantage of having Peters do the same? If they don't play their goon then no need to to play Peters. If they do then there is no disadvantage in playing him. It's a saw off ,right? I think that is fairly simple to understand.

But saying we can't play Peters because he is a poor player or, to use your description, a 'garbage player' is to ignore that his opposites are also so-called 'garbage players'. What we, like the other team gain, is that we won't be bullied. And if you don't think that doesn't go on in hockey you need to get out games more.

Moreover, calling these players 'garbage players' is also irrelevant. They may be garbage players but they are there. Giving them some sort of negative label does not improve your argument (only an example of using loaded terms) and doesn't change the fact that these guys are scattered across the League. When we go play Colorado, Koci will be there. When we play Toronto, Orr will be there and when we play Edmonton, MacIntrye will be there. If you have no one to counter-act them then you put yourself in possible trouble. And, given the feeble penalties for head shots and other hits, don't tell me the League is there to protect you.

You ask when I saw a star player get targeted - well last year Boogaard nailed Mitchell leaving him groggy on the ice. A few days later Mitchell got hurt again by Malkin which finished him off. And Scott punched Bolduc's lights out and put him out for the year. Janssen ran Kaberle and put him out, Kariya was nailed by Stevens and there are many, many other examples. Also having the only intimidator gives other players the green light, like Cooke, to run people. If they know they have more solid physical back up on their team they will play more aggressively

And yes a player like Janssen will be less likely to run around making all out hits if he knows someone like Peters in in the game. He at least knows he will have to anwser to someone or that Peters will begin to target some of his players. And if you don't belief this just think how much more Janssen would be running round if no one was putting a stop to it.

Not to recognize the need for an enforcer is to be incredibly short-sighted and is refuted by the fact that such people are actively sought out by all GMs. If Canucks go into game situations all year where the other team has an intimating presence and we have none then we are at bad disadvantage which will lead to more difficult situations for the team. How people can't see this is beyond me.

It seems to be that you always knock down on the physical guys and expect everyone to be highly skilled. I had a running argument that Mike Brown had place in the League while you guaranteed he did not. You insisted he lacked skill, that he couldn't score so had no chance and that his toughness was a non-factor.. In fact you were wrong. Brown is turning into the prototypical 4th line player and PK specialist that some, such as Heisinger, said he would , and you insisted he could never be. It always seems to me that you reject this type of player out of hand. Almost seems you want a team with all skill and no toughness. That might agree with your aesthetic values but would be a disaster if done.

Remember there was time Gino Odjick was a horrible player - maybe worst than Peters - but he was instrumental to Bure's success. You went after Bure you dealt with Gino. Somehow you have contrived a thought that players like Gino are no longer have a role. But the facts is that almost all the stars have someone to look out for them. I don't think it would be a bad thing at all that a guy like Peters looks after the Sedins.

Finally, you might want a enforcer that can enforce and actually play. But those kind of players are rare and expensive. Until we are fortunate enough to get such a player we should look at Peters because he is the closest thing we have, albeit not very good player, to being the enforcing player on the team. Yes we can't play him a lot. Someone like Malhotra or Hansen will have to pick up some more minutes if he plays. And yes he will not play all the time. But he does mean that he will not, at times, have a role and not to recognize this to have your head planted, like an ostrich, firmly in the sand. I hope and believe that Gillis is not thinking this way.

orcatown is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-08-2010, 12:12 PM
  #204
Barney Gumble
Registered User
 
Barney Gumble's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 20,432
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by orcatown View Post
Remember there was time Gino Odjick was a horrible player - maybe worst than Peters - but he was instrumental to Bure's success. You went after Bure you dealt with Gino.
Didn't stop Churla from going after Bure. Course, we all know how that Bure defended himself....

A bit of the chicken or the egg question - would Bure have done that without Odjick there to back him up? Tough to answer as Bure did have a short-fuse at times.

I don't have a problem with a player like Peters - provided he has a contract like he has (two-way minimum age deal; not subject to recall waivers). That way he doesn't have to be on the roster the whole season.

Barney Gumble is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
10-08-2010, 12:14 PM
  #205
The Bob Cole
Ohhhh Baby.
 
The Bob Cole's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Centre Ice
Country: Canada
Posts: 7,677
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by orcatown View Post
This is naive nonsense.

You think that it defies common sense to say other teams take advantage of you if you have no deterrence. Hordichuk has says he intends to go after the Sedins and may well end up fighting Glass.

The fact that Ivanins bloodied up Paavarri was evidence that the Edmonton's younger players could be targets. Macintyre fight was crucial because it illustrates he is there to protect those youngster. He exactly played that role.

Awful example, was it not an errant high-stick? That could have come from Kyle Wellwood, it didn't have to be a goon.

The Bob Cole is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-08-2010, 01:08 PM
  #206
LeftCoast
Registered User
 
LeftCoast's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Vancouver
Country: Canada
Posts: 6,799
vCash: 500
How many games per year does a "puncher" win you?


I enjoy a good hockey fight, but let's be honest, fighting in hockey is about entertainment. Nothing more; nothing less. The heavyweights of the league only ever fight each other.

Fighting is not a deterrent to cheap shots - because no/few players are afraid of a hockey fight. The only players who get hurt in hockey fights are the guys who stand in there and throw bombs at each other. If you are not a fighter and you get jumped you can clinch, turtle or skate away. If the fight is an obvious mismatch, the linesmen (and usually your teammates) are in there immediately. If no one is afraid of a fight, where is the deterrent?

It's also sort of against the "code" for a heavyweight to take on a lightweight or challenge a skilled player. That doesn't mean someone won't take a cheap shot at a skilled player, but it is the power play and league discipline that are the deterrent, not fighting. Besides, it seems now-a-days most or at least many fights are the result of a clean hit on a skilled player. So what is that deterring?

What would be a deterrent to cheap shots (if it were common place) would be major atrocities - Bertuzzi/Moore, Eddie Shore/Ace Bailey, Richard/Laycoe type incidents - but no one really wants to see that type of violence in hockey. But the fact that cheap shot artists like Jordin Tootoo, Matt Cooke, Steve Downie and Chris Pronger (yes - he is a cheap shot artist) are still running around hurting people and rarely if ever fight is a testament to the inadequacy of fighting as a deterrent.

Matt Cooke has been doing this stuff for years - and he just skates away from fights while yapping and chirping. Same thing with Tootoo.

Pronger is a real special case - I mean who is going to take on a 6'6", 250lb monster who is also a perennial all star. But if after he put an elbow to the back of Thomas Holmstrom's head, or into Dean McAmmond's face, or tried to stomped on Kesler's leg, since the league is reticent to give a meaningful suspension to such a prominent player, someone had speared him in the face or took out his knees, it might have sent a message - if not to Pronger, then maybe to others of his ilk.

So if Hordichuk wants to take a run at Daniel or Henrik - based on Hordi's history in the league, it is not likely to be a cheap shot. But if he runs one of the Sedins (or any of our skilled players) someone is going to invite him to dance (Rypien, Desbiens, Bolduc, Alberts, Bieksa, etc.). They don't have to beat Hordichuk because winning or losing a fight is somewhat irrelevant. If they want to provide some entertainment for the fans, then stand in and punch with him. But someone will honour the tradition and hang on or dance until the linesmen break it up.

LeftCoast is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-08-2010, 01:14 PM
  #207
Bobby Lou
Moustache Power
 
Bobby Lou's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: The Crease
Country: Canada
Posts: 15,379
vCash: 894
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mick Jagr View Post
Awful example, was it not an errant high-stick? That could have come from Kyle Wellwood, it didn't have to be a goon.
Lol, exactly. Pajaarvi took a stick in the mouth; it wasn't exactly a targeted play...more like a total accident. I'm not too worried; again lets use the Detroit example because what exactly do they do when these 'goons' go after their skilled players? Oh ya, post 100+ point seasons repeatedly.

Bobby Lou is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-08-2010, 02:01 PM
  #208
Ernie
Registered User
 
Ernie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 10,126
vCash: 500
I do think that the fights also get the players going, not just the fans.

But this year the Canucks shouldn't need that motivation.

Ernie is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-08-2010, 06:05 PM
  #209
MS
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Vancouver, BC
Posts: 13,377
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by orcatown View Post
This is naive nonsense.

You think that it defies common sense to say other teams take advantage of you if you have no deterrence. Hordichuk has says he intends to go after the Sedins and may well end up fighting Glass.
All you're doing is repeating the cliched Cherry-esque nonsense that gets drilled into Canadian hockey fans but has no basis in common sense or reality.

In 2 years here, how often did Hordichuk go after the other team's star player? How often was he in the face of Kane or Iginla or Stastny or Thornton? Absolutely never. Was never even on the ice at the same time.

And again, why would a goon take a run at a star player without another goon in the lineup but not do it when a goon is dressed? Fighting justifies these guys' existence and they love to do it, so why would the threat of a fight make something like that less likely? Makes ZERO sense.

Quote:
Originally Posted by orcatown View Post
The fact that Ivanins bloodied up Paavarri was evidence that the Edmonton's younger players could be targets. Macintyre fight was crucial because it illustrates he is there to protect those youngster. He exactly played that role.
Paarjavi was hit by an accidental high stick.


Quote:
Originally Posted by orcatown View Post
But who are the Canuck going to turn to if it becomes obvious that Belak, or Orr, or MacIntryre, or Janssesn, or Koci or any number of people including Hordichuk decide to go after our defense or better players? Basically we are left, using your logic, hoping they don't or turning the other cheek. (and if this is done you can kiss goodbye to your chances for the Stanley Cup)
What?

When did Detroit kiss their chances for the Cup goodbye by doing this? Carolina, when they won the Cup with Staal is their leading PIM guy up front by a mile? Chicago last year, when they were were of the most seldom-fighting teams in the league and their 'enforcer' Eager was actually more of a middleweight agitator?

Again, Belak/Orr/Macintyre are hacks who play 3-4 minutes/game almost entirely against the other team's 4th line. They simply don't 'go after star players' and even if they did, dressing a Peters/Hordichuk isn't going to stop them.

Quote:
Originally Posted by orcatown View Post
And who cares if Peters plays five minutes - that's all the other enforcers play. Or who cares that Peters can't play. Do you think MacIntyre can play or Koci or any of the other enforcers can. Everyone knows they are not there to play and the fact that none of them can play negates this as an argument against Peters. If the other team is going to put a goon on the bench for a few minutes what's the big disadvantage of having Peters do the same? If they don't play their goon then no need to to play Peters. If they do then there is no disadvantage in playing him. It's a saw off ,right? I think that is fairly simple to understand.

But saying we can't play Peters because he is a poor player or, to use your description, a 'garbage player' is to ignore that his opposites are also so-called 'garbage players'. What we, like the other team gain, is that we won't be bullied. And if you don't think that doesn't go on in hockey you need to get out games more.
Good grief.

We lose by dressing a garbage player because it makes our team worse.

I'm all for having toughness in the form of guys who can control the 17 guys on the other team who can actually play and stir stuff up. I could give a rat's ass if we have an answer to one of the 2 or 3 super-heavyweights in our conference who play 3 minutes/game.

And again, the notion that 'we won't be bullied' with an Andrew Peters in the lineup is ridiculous.

Quote:
Originally Posted by orcatown View Post
Moreover, calling these players 'garbage players' is also irrelevant. They may be garbage players but they are there. Giving them some sort of negative label does not improve your argument (only an example of using loaded terms) and doesn't change the fact that these guys are scattered across the League. When we go play Colorado, Koci will be there. When we play Toronto, Orr will be there and when we play Edmonton, MacIntrye will be there. If you have no one to counter-act them then you put yourself in possible trouble. And, given the feeble penalties for head shots and other hits, don't tell me the League is there to protect you.
Did we ever even notice Koci or McGrattan last season? Nope. These guys play so little that any impact they have is non-existent.

And yet again, the notion that the other team's goon is less likely to throw a cheapshot with Andrew Peters in the lineup is absolutely ridiculous.


Quote:
Originally Posted by orcatown View Post
You ask when I saw a star player get targeted - well last year Boogaard nailed Mitchell leaving him groggy on the ice. A few days later Mitchell got hurt again by Malkin which finished him off. And Scott punched Bolduc's lights out and put him out for the year. Janssen ran Kaberle and put him out, Kariya was nailed by Stevens and there are many, many other examples. Also having the only intimidator gives other players the green light, like Cooke, to run people. If they know they have more solid physical back up on their team they will play more aggressively
Thank you for bringing up the Boogaard-Mitchell play. Because guess what? Hordichuk was dressed for that game. And it didn't stop Boogaard from doing anything. Which is exactly my point.

Bolduc fought Scott to try and win points from the coaching staff and it backfired. And again, Hordichuk was dressed. Didn't stop anything.

Matt Cooke played exactly the same way whether an enforcer was dressed or not. Same as Burrows. Again, use some common sense. These guys will never, ever have to fight an enforcer. So why would an enforcer being in the lineup change their play?

Quote:
Originally Posted by orcatown View Post
And yes a player like Janssen will be less likely to run around making all out hits if he knows someone like Peters in in the game. He at least knows he will have to anwser to someone or that Peters will begin to target some of his players. And if you don't belief this just think how much more Janssen would be running round if no one was putting a stop to it.
Janssen is in the vaste horde of players who can be handled by Rypien and Glass. We're talking about the need to waste roster spot on a player solely to fight the 3 or 4 guys in the conference that Rypien/Glass/Desbiens can't.


Quote:
Originally Posted by orcatown View Post
Not to recognize the need for an enforcer is to be incredibly short-sighted and is refuted by the fact that such people are actively sought out by all GMs. If Canucks go into game situations all year where the other team has an intimating presence and we have none then we are at bad disadvantage which will lead to more difficult situations for the team. How people can't see this is beyond me.
All GMs?

Toughness, sure. Goons, no. The pure goon is a dying breed.

Quote:
Originally Posted by orcatown View Post
It seems to be that you always knock down on the physical guys and expect everyone to be highly skilled. I had a running argument that Mike Brown had place in the League while you guaranteed he did not. You insisted he lacked skill, that he couldn't score so had no chance and that his toughness was a non-factor.. In fact you were wrong. Brown is turning into the prototypical 4th line player and PK specialist that some, such as Heisinger, said he would , and you insisted he could never be. It always seems to me that you reject this type of player out of hand. Almost seems you want a team with all skill and no toughness. That might agree with your aesthetic values but would be a disaster if done.
I like toughness that can play.

In hindsight, Brown improved in Anaheim and would have been a better choice to keep than Hordichuk. But at the time he'd had a brutal camp and had no place on this team, which already had similar players in Rypien and Hordichuk. And is still a very marginal NHL player who Anaheim gave away for a 5th round pick last offseason.

Quote:
Originally Posted by orcatown View Post
Remember there was time Gino Odjick was a horrible player - maybe worst than Peters - but he was instrumental to Bure's success. You went after Bure you dealt with Gino. Somehow you have contrived a thought that players like Gino are no longer have a role. But the facts is that almost all the stars have someone to look out for them. I don't think it would be a bad thing at all that a guy like Peters looks after the Sedins.
First off, Odjick was a very solid player for a goon. In his only stint in the minors before coming up to Vancouver, he had 7 goals in 17 games. Scored 16 once in the NHL. Peters has 11 goals in 10 professional seasons.

Second, it's a different era. When Gino broke in, it was still basically 1980s hockey where goons DID run around and do the things you're talking about. But those days are over.

Quote:
Originally Posted by orcatown View Post
Finally, you might want a enforcer that can enforce and actually play. But those kind of players are rare and expensive. Until we are fortunate enough to get such a player we should look at Peters because he is the closest thing we have, albeit not very good player, to being the enforcing player on the team. Yes we can't play him a lot. Someone like Malhotra or Hansen will have to pick up some more minutes if he plays. And yes he will not play all the time. But he does mean that he will not, at times, have a role and not to recognize this to have your head planted, like an ostrich, firmly in the sand. I hope and believe that Gillis is not thinking this way.
My head isn't planted in the sand.

I can see pretty clearly that teams have had no trouble being successful without a goon, and that common sense dictates that a guy who plays 3 minutes/game 40 games/year will not have a significant impact on our team.

Absolutely we need toughness. Team toughness. There are 18 guys on opposing rosters, not 1. To tailor a lineup to deal with their least important player is ridiculous.

MS is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
10-08-2010, 06:08 PM
  #210
Mr. Canucklehead
Mod Supervisor
Kitimat Canuck
 
Mr. Canucklehead's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Kitimat, BC
Country: Canada
Posts: 24,110
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by MS View Post
...
Wow. Just...wow.

If this was Facebook, I'd hit the "Like" button. Awesome stuff, MS.

Mr. Canucklehead is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-08-2010, 06:13 PM
  #211
hlrsr
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 2,389
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bobby Lou View Post
Lol, exactly. Pajaarvi took a stick in the mouth; it wasn't exactly a targeted play...more like a total accident. I'm not too worried; again lets use the Detroit example because what exactly do they do when these 'goons' go after their skilled players? Oh ya, post 100+ point seasons repeatedly.
Yeah, horrible example. I think Pajaarvi was hit on Ivanans follow-through.

orcatown, I'm curious, with all those cheapshots you posted (Janssen on Kaberle etc.), did the other team have a goon on their roster?

hlrsr is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-08-2010, 06:51 PM
  #212
Drop the Sopel
Feaster famine
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: calgary
Posts: 16,156
vCash: 500
If heavyweights are crucial to team success why do the majority of them sit in the pressbox for the most important games of the year? Are coaches intentionally sabotoging themselves?

The Chicago Blackhawks did not have a heavyweight and they did alright for themselves. Why didn't we have the hammer over them even though Ben Eager refused to look Darcy Hordichuk in the face? Hmmmm.

I used to be a huge fan of heavyweights and fighting in hockey in general but since MMA has made it's way into the mainstream and become so accessible it just doesn't matter that much any more. If you want to see a good scrap, just change the channel. I still love to see a good tussle in a hockey game but the days of depending on the NHL to get my fill of violence are over. That is why I could care less if the Canucks carry a heavyweight - it's simply a form of entertainment and I get mine elsewhere.

Drop the Sopel is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-08-2010, 07:20 PM
  #213
ddawg1950
Registered User
 
ddawg1950's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 9,985
vCash: 500
Well, I do love to see the boys drop 'em and go. And us oldies always wear rose coloured glasses about "the good old days." But it seemed to me that the guys that were enforcers in them good old daze were also hockey players. But the heavyweight classification changed that. Suddenly, we've got guys like MacIntyre, Boogie and the like huffing around the ice waiting for their 30 seconds of fame. But they add nothing to the game of hockey and they certainly don't "enforce" anything. What, Henrik is going to be worried? Hell, is MacIntyre starts running around against us, I say take the two minutes and bury them on the PP. If they keep up and run our stars, then beat the $%&t out of Hall or somebody.

The fact is, if we don't dress a heavyweight then their cro-magnon man has nobody to fight.

Finally, I think the days of the heavyweight are numbered. But guys who can hit, fight and skate are worth just as much as ever. That's why I don't mind Glass or the Ripper. These guys aren't the most skilled, but they can play and they can handle 99% of the cheap shot artists who play this game. Fighting will always be part of the game, IMO, but guys who can't skate, or play the game, or contribute in anyway but wrestling with the other heavyweight are disappearing.

Good.


Last edited by ddawg1950: 10-08-2010 at 09:27 PM.
ddawg1950 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-09-2010, 05:35 AM
  #214
orcatown
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Posts: 7,718
vCash: 500
You say the pure goon is a dieing breed. Let's check the facts. Which teams have a pure goons

Philly - Shelly
Boston - Thornton/McGratton
Chicago - John Scott
Pittsburg - Eric Goddard
Toronto - Orr
Minny - Staubitz
Rangers - Boogaard
Ottawa - Carkner
Washington D. J. King
Anahiem - Parros/Sutton et. al.
Buffalo - McCormick
Dallas - Barch
Carolina - Dwyer
Phoenix - Bissonette
Nashville - Belak
Atlanta - Boulton
NYI - Konopka/Rechlicz
Edmonton - MacIntyre
Florida - Hordichuk
St Louis - Janssen
Colorado - Koci
Calgary - Ivanians

And lots of these team have tertiary toughness as well.

To say there are two or three goons in our conference is flat out wrong. You use Detroit as if it were the norm and it obviously isn't. They don't carry a recognized goon right now. But they tired. They brought in Downey during the pre-season but he got clobbered by Boulerice. Moreover, the way the Ducks went after them tonite I bet they will soon be looking for someone. You can't have Datysuk fighting every game or people like Sutton laying people out with no response.

To think we reached some golden age where goonery is some distant memory is rubbish. Last year, we saw as many fights, as many cheap shots and as much thuggery as we have ever seen. There are as many goons in the game (and they are bigger and stronger) as we have ever seen . Look at the list. The fact that Rangers were willing to pay big money to Boogaard (so they wouldn't have to see their star Gaborik duking it out with Carcillo any more) is testimony to the continued recognition of the value and need for goons.

Can't you at least try to see the utility of Peters to the team. Why be so extreme or so categorical in your dismissal of his worth. Hopefully Rypein or Glass can handle all the rough stuff. But it might well be they get punched out by others on the list. Do you really want to see Rypien going with Koci or MacIntyre??? Can't you see the value of having someone like Peters (a true heavyweight) in the bull pen. Doesn't he provide some insurance if we need toughness.

Peters is little different than many on the above list. To say he is now useless because goons are going out of date defies the reality that nearly every team has at least one goon. Using the one example of Detroit as proof is simply overwhelmed by the number of teams that have goons and feel the need for them

Maybe all these GMs are wrong. Maybe you know more than they do. But to deny that goons still play as central role in hockey is manifestly refuted by the facts.

As to other points.

You were way over- board on your criticisms of Brown and never recognized the type of player he was. It's isn't like he went to Anahiem and became, overnight, a different player. He had the potential to be what he is (a serviceable 4th liner and PK guy) when he was here.

Odjick never makes into the league if he can't fight. He was not a good hockey player. Proof of this was that he was benched during a good part of the playoff run in '94 after his best season in the league. If he was that good wouldn't he have been used at this critical time. There is no way he could have made it just as a player. He had to goon it up to get employment in the NHL. I think it is beyond obvious that Odjick chief role was to protect Bure. And just like then we still have Goddards riding shot gun for the Crosbys. To say this isn't so just seems absurd to me.

orcatown is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-09-2010, 05:46 AM
  #215
BoHorvatFan
Registered User
 
BoHorvatFan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Vancouver
Posts: 9,098
vCash: 500
I'm not a pro goon/enforcer guy, I prefer skill at all positions. But I will say this, in 2007-2008 our team was abused. The Sedins took a lot of shots after whistles, Luongo was bumped a lot and there was never a response. Guys like Cowen tried and failed pretty bad. We were a team that had no toughness(although some thought we had enough with kesler, burrows, mitchell, bieksa....) but in reality we were one of the softest, easiest teams to play against in the league. We had Burrows getting beat up by Carcillo and a guy like Pyatt risking injury against Ivanans and actually doing pretty well but still you don't want valuable players fighting thugs.

Now as much as I disliked Hordichuk as a hockey player and even dislike Rypien as a hockey player, and as much as I couldn't stand SOB I can admit that there was a serious decrease in the amount of abuse our best players took over the past two seasons.

If we find ourselves in a situation where valuable players are risking injury fighting a lot, and our best players are being taken advantage of, we will need to bring somebody in who can take care of things.

It's an 82 game season and our goal is to do well in the playoffs. That means our best players need to stay healthy. We'll see how things go.

BoHorvatFan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-09-2010, 06:05 AM
  #216
Meganuck*
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Vancouver,BC
Country: Canada
Posts: 11,036
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by orcatown View Post
You say the pure goon is a dieing breed. Let's check the facts. Which teams have a pure goons

Philly - Shelly
Boston - Thornton/McGratton
Chicago - John Scott
Pittsburg - Eric Goddard
Toronto - Orr
Minny - Staubitz
Rangers - Boogaard
Ottawa - Carkner
Washington D. J. King
Anahiem - Parros/Sutton et. al.
Buffalo - McCormick
Dallas - Barch
Carolina - Dwyer
Phoenix - Bissonette
Nashville - Belak
Atlanta - Boulton
NYI - Konopka/Rechlicz
Edmonton - MacIntyre
Florida - Hordichuk
St Louis - Janssen
Colorado - Koci
Calgary - Ivanians
You're reaching with guys like Barch, Godard (who didnt even play), Carkner (not just a fighter) and King (didnt play against a tough team like the Thrashers).

Thornton can actually take a regular shift and Rypien handled Janssen pretty well last season.

I would say that a team like Chicago last year went with team toughness as they didnt have a resident goon playing. John Scott is being used as a regular #6 dman moreso than a goon due to cap restraints.

I dont think the need for a goon is as big as you make it. Peters would be a waste of a roster spot. Why not just get a guy like Riley Cote, if he's not braindead.

Meganuck* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-09-2010, 06:38 AM
  #217
ZyggZagg
Registered User
 
ZyggZagg's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Burnaby
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,173
vCash: 500
Goons don't stop anything. In my opinion, it would be better to have a psycho on your team. Fighting isn't really a deterrent, but I guarantee you if Moore knew what was going to happen next, he wouldn't have hung a knee on Naslund. In fact, that whole situation is proof for why fighting doesn't matter. How scared was Moore to hit Naslund, when he could just choose not to fight?

ZyggZagg is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-09-2010, 06:46 AM
  #218
orcatown
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Posts: 7,718
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Meganuck View Post
You're reaching with guys like Barch, Godard (who didnt even play), Carkner (not just a fighter) and King (didnt play against a tough team like the Thrashers).

Thornton can actually take a regular shift and Rypien handled Janssen pretty well last season.

I would say that a team like Chicago last year went with team toughness as they didnt have a resident goon playing. John Scott is being used as a regular #6 dman moreso than a goon due to cap restraints.

I dont think the need for a goon is as big as you make it. Peters would be a waste of a roster spot. Why not just get a guy like Riley Cote, if he's not braindead.
Chicago had good size and grit up and down the lineup Brouwer, Bickell, Eager, Ladd, Byfulgien, Burish, Seabrook, Fraser etc... Kind of did by committee. If you have that luxury then it is possible to avoid having an all out goon (although Eager is extremely close to being in this category). But very few teams are in, are were in, the position of the Black Hawks

Barch is only there as an enforcer. Maybe he is not a great one but doesn't get there unless he is willing to throw down with other teams tough guy.

Carkner has evolved into a decent defenseman but still he is there to go with people like Orr. His fights with Orr establish him as a tough guy and I still think that is his primary goal.

Fact Rypein had successful fight with Janssen does not remove the fact that Janssen is only there as goon. He is certainly not there because he can play. Janssens could just as easily beat up Rypein next time.

Goddard is on the Pittsburg roster and will be used when necessary. He is an absolute example of a goon. Don't know how you can challenge him as a goon. So is King. Scott only plays because the Hawks are so thin on defense and his role will be as an enforcer.

You may quibble around the edges here but the fact is there are lots of goons around the League and the argument that we are now in the twilight of the goon era has little substance.

Peters is no more a waste of roster spot than most of these players are. He is your 13th forward who comes in when necessary and only when necessary. Rather have a legit player like Tambellini playing on the Moose and working on his game.

I applaud Gillis for getting Peters just in case he is necessary and for knowing he may be of use.

orcatown is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-09-2010, 12:12 PM
  #219
Ernie
Registered User
 
Ernie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 10,126
vCash: 500
Bob McKenzie's take on staged heavyweight fights:

Quote:
Based entirely on the premise that it's never too early in the season to be called a *****(cat), can someone please explain to me the purpose/meaning/significance of the Steve MacIntyre smackdown of Raitis Ivanans last night in Edmonton?
http://tsn.ca/blogs/bob_mckenzie/?id=336705

Ernie is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-09-2010, 12:32 PM
  #220
Drop the Sopel
Feaster famine
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: calgary
Posts: 16,156
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by orcatown View Post
I applaud Gillis for getting Peters just in case he is necessary and for knowing he may be of use.
You're really misunderstanding what's going on here. The Hordichuk/Peters trade doesn't signify Mike Gillis wants a 240lb heavyweight in the lineup - it signifies the end to the Canucks carrying a legitimate heavyweight enforcer. Andrew Peters was not acquired to be a Vancouver Canuck.

Can you please explain to me why so many coaches pull their toughest player out of the lineup in games that mean something? I'm still waiting to here why these coaches intentionally sabotoge themselves.

Drop the Sopel is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-09-2010, 12:42 PM
  #221
ddawg1950
Registered User
 
ddawg1950's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 9,985
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Drop the Sopel View Post
You're really misunderstanding what's going on here. The Hordichuk/Peters trade doesn't signify Mike Gillis wants a 240lb heavyweight in the lineup - it signifies the end to the Canucks carrying a legitimate heavyweight enforcer. Andrew Peters was not acquired to be a Vancouver Canuck.

Can you please explain to me why so many coaches pull their toughest player out of the lineup in games that mean something? I'm still waiting to here why these coaches intentionally sabotoge themselves.
Perfect!

If we don't dress a heavyweight...who is their guy going to fight? It's the sound of one hand clapping.

ddawg1950 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-09-2010, 01:20 PM
  #222
LostMyGlasses*
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Simon Fraser
Country: Canada
Posts: 9,431
vCash: 500
I constantly hear Detroit being brought up as an example of "anti-fighting", of how they don't appreciate fighting, they don't think it leads anywhere, how it only "fires up the other team 50% of the time"...


And yet last night, after Pavel "Lady Byng" Datsyuk took on the much bigger, tougher and more experienced Corey Perry, the entire Red Wings bench was standing cheering for Datsyuk, Detroit players were waiting to tap Datsyuk, etc.

We don't need a guy like Hordichuk if we can muster that kind of iron will throughout the team. I think the Canucks took a stride in the right direction this off season, but the key is definitely in the top 6.

Most people commenting that cheap shot artists aren't deterred by goons are correct. But, for a team like ours, we can turn a cheap shot against one of our better players into a positive. Much like Datsyuk standing up to Perry, if some of our skilled players do that in a more constructive way this season, it will go a long way in establishing the team toughness necessary to win a cup.

Instead of Daniel crosschecking someone's wrists, or slashing, or whatever he wants to do when he's frustrated with Bolland or whoever else is pestering him, I'd like to see him do what Datsyuk did here. Re-affirm the backbone and team concept we have and take the jerk on. You don't have to throw haymakers, but you've got to be able to hang in there. Win or loss, the entire team will not forget that kind of gesture, the message it sends to the least of the players on the team.

You dont want a goon? Then we've got to be team tough, and it starts on that first line.

LostMyGlasses* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-09-2010, 01:26 PM
  #223
Balls Mahoney
wants more Sesito
 
Balls Mahoney's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: +44 1252 230 607
Country: United States
Posts: 12,807
vCash: 500
Man, I approve of Orcatown dropping science in this thread.

__________________
Balls Mahoney is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-09-2010, 01:41 PM
  #224
Drop the Sopel
Feaster famine
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: calgary
Posts: 16,156
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by LostMyGlasses View Post
I constantly hear Detroit being brought up as an example of "anti-fighting", of how they don't appreciate fighting, they don't think it leads anywhere, how it only "fires up the other team 50% of the time"...


And yet last night, after Pavel "Lady Byng" Datsyuk took on the much bigger, tougher and more experienced Corey Perry, the entire Red Wings bench was standing cheering for Datsyuk, Detroit players were waiting to tap Datsyuk, etc.

We don't need a guy like Hordichuk if we can muster that kind of iron will throughout the team. I think the Canucks took a stride in the right direction this off season, but the key is definitely in the top 6.

Most people commenting that cheap shot artists aren't deterred by goons are correct. But, for a team like ours, we can turn a cheap shot against one of our better players into a positive. Much like Datsyuk standing up to Perry, if some of our skilled players do that in a more constructive way this season, it will go a long way in establishing the team toughness necessary to win a cup.

Instead of Daniel crosschecking someone's wrists, or slashing, or whatever he wants to do when he's frustrated with Bolland or whoever else is pestering him, I'd like to see him do what Datsyuk did here. Re-affirm the backbone and team concept we have and take the jerk on. You don't have to throw haymakers, but you've got to be able to hang in there. Win or loss, the entire team will not forget that kind of gesture, the message it sends to the least of the players on the team.

You dont want a goon? Then we've got to be team tough, and it starts on that first line.
So we need more guys like Pavel Dasyuk that help with team toughness? Okay. That was the first fight of his life.

I still don't see why anyone would discredit the model of the most successful franchise of the modern era. They don't carry a heavyweight and seem to perform consistently at an elite level. Anyone who thinks they have more team toughness than the Canucks just isn't paying attention.

I still don't understand this notion that fighting fires up a team more than 50% of the time. Why does it help the team you cheer for more than the team someone else cheers for? There are 2 guys in every fight... If Hordichuk and Parros square off 10 times why are we getting more of a boost than Anaheim? It's an honest question.

Drop the Sopel is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-09-2010, 01:47 PM
  #225
VanEric
Registered User
 
VanEric's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Vancouver
Country: Canada
Posts: 14,344
vCash: 500
A circular argument that has been going on forever on this board.

VanEric is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Forum Jump


Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 12:34 AM.

monitoring_string = "e4251c93e2ba248d29da988d93bf5144"
Contact Us - HFBoards - Archive - Privacy Statement - Terms of Use - Advertise - Top - AdChoices

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. 2014 All Rights Reserved.