I feel we were a different team with Konopka and Carkner in the lineup against NYR. They wouldn't run around playing dirty because we'd have people to answer the bell. I feel we've lost that while our division just got a bit rougher with Prust going to the Canadiens and Ott and Scott going to Buffalo.
Even if it's for certain opponents, having someone like Carkner available is pretty damn important. ZK was also a pretty good PKer and faceoff man, it wasn't like he was completely useless, despite his wrestling matches.
Without toughness you become the Buffalo Sabres and get your star player destroyed by Lucic.
That never would have happened to us with Carkner on the ice. Neil would stand up for us, but Lucic is too big for Neil. Carks is the only one to "deter" him in the first place. Don't forget we play in a division with the Bruins.
We were one of the only teams to match them or stand up to them last year, and now were not
Lucic ran Miller cause he is a coward and knew that the league was soft on hits. It is worth getting a beat down if you can take out the other teams best player, having Carkner would not have made Lucic slow down.
Boston's toughness did nothing to stop Rome from destroying Horton, while actually they rallied around the hit and took control of the series. Then Vancouver goes out and trades their best prospect/player Hodgson for "toughness" in Kassian and lose their MVP and get bumped in the first round.
I don't understand why some people think we need a Scott Stevens type player in today's NHL. They are dying off and when the NHL gets some consistency in ruling on illegal hits, enforcers will be more of a liability than a help.
Lucic ran Miller cause he is a coward and knew that the league was soft on hits. It is worth getting a beat down if you can take out the other teams best player, having Carkner would not have made Lucic slow down.
Boston's toughness did nothing to stop Rome from destroying Horton, while actually they rallied around the hit and took control of the series. Then Vancouver goes out and trades their best prospect/player Hodgson for "toughness" in Kassian and lose their MVP and get bumped in the first round.
I don't understand why some people think we need a Scott Stevens type player in today's NHL. They are dying off and when the NHL gets some consistency in ruling on illegal hits, enforcers will be more of a liability than a help.
What? I could understand if you used Colton Orr or some other pure enforcer as your reference point, but Scott Stevens? Really? Why wouldn't we want a Scott Stevens kind of player? That is exactly the kind of player we need on the sens. We need nasty players who are actually skilled and are not liabilities on the ice.
What? I could understand if you used Colton Orr or some other pure enforcer as your reference point, but Scott Stevens? Really? Why wouldn't we want a Scott Stevens kind of player? That is exactly the kind of player we need on the sens. We need nasty players who are actually skilled and are not liabilities on the ice.
My point is that players that are on the bench just to seek revenge or go after the other teams good players, are dying out, the fans may want them but Bettman doesn't. Scott Stevens was all I could think about at the moment so I used him.
Maybe this is as good a place to post this as any:
Would anyone else support a deal with the Rags for Dylan McIlrath? They have a glut of young Dmen and we have a glut of young forwards. A 1 for 1 swap would be ideal here but maybe not possible.
The addition of McIlrath would help us by adding not only a defensive prospect thats close to NHL on the backend but would bring some serious jam to our line-up which we're sorely lacking now, and could also take a regular shift.
Depending on how highly the Rags value him I feel like this could be a good move for us.
I don't know if McIlrath has that much more potential than Gryba or Sdao. Considering that Sdao and Gryba are very similar players to McIlrath, it might be better to just stick with them.
Without toughness you become the Buffalo Sabres and get your star player destroyed by Lucic.
That never would have happened to us with Carkner on the ice. Neil would stand up for us, but Lucic is too big for Neil. Carks is the only one to "deter" him in the first place. Don't forget we play in a division with the Bruins.
We were one of the only teams to match them or stand up to them last year, and now were not
Chara and Lucic were on the ice when Cooke blindsided Savard.
The idea that "tough" players prevent people from taking runs is fantasy.
Sens are fine, in fact cutting out all those PIMS will be a positive. This team was shorthanded way too much last season.
Methot, Cowen, Smith and Neil can all drop them when needed. I still feel like we lost a lot of that nuclear deterrent with letting Carkner go. I also feel like Neil was at his best with a guy like Gratts or Carkner in the lineup.
One thing we have to remember, Maclean, although not afraid to drop'em himself, is from the Detroit school of hockey. They play tough from whistle to whistle but never get involved in the after-the-whistle shenanigans..
Fighting isn't everything but we still have players capable of doing so. If Neil is reduced to a 4th line role and less powerplay time, his main job will be fighting anyways.
[The idea that 'tough' players have any kind of effect is not even a question because it is universally accepted among coaches and anyone that has extensive, heck, even a moderate knowledge of hockey that they do have an effect. I can accept if fans think Carkner or Konopka are liabilities, and that the Sens have improved skill-wise with the replacements brought in. Fine. But to say they had no effect in protecting other players on the team, or that their mere presence didn't make everyone feel an inch taller, is beyond comprehension.
The mentality of Sens fans in particular that take the approach that they have no effect, must not remember the Senators from the early 2000's during the Jacques Martin era. Most people that post here now days weren't around, but the number one thing fans wanted back then was toughness. These last few years Ottawa has had sufficient toughness, these types of players have become taken for granted. Go ask a Montreal fan how bad they want a player with toughness. You don't realize how valuable those types of players are until you lose them.
Now, I think we'll be fine with the toughness on the team, probably middle of the pack in the league. But I take exception to the idea that 'tough' players have no effect or offer no protection.
But to say they had no effect in protecting other players on the team, or that their mere presence didn't make everyone feel an inch taller, is beyond comprehension.
1) We saw the effect that Carkner had in game 2 vs NYR. Pummeling Boyle changed the momentum of the series (We still lost the series, but that series is over quicker without Carkner). You can see how the team 'grew an inch' after. The team magically went from being overwhelmed physically to matching the Rangers hit-for-hit, maybe even surpassing them.
Quote:
Originally Posted by H2ODP
The mentality of Sens fans in particular that take the approach that they have no effect, must not remember the Senators from the early 2000's during the Jacques Martin era. Most people that post here now days weren't around, but the number one thing fans wanted back then was toughness. These last few years Ottawa has had sufficient toughness, these types of players have become taken for granted. Go ask a Montreal fan how bad they want a player with toughness. You don't realize how valuable those types of players are until you lose them.
2) We had Chris Neil during that era, and fans still overwhelmingly thought we lacked toughness. Outside of Chris Neil, are we tougher than we were compared to the Martin era? I think we're fine, I'd like additional toughness personally, but I just wanted to mention this.
1) We saw the effect that Carkner had in game 2 vs NYR. Pummeling Boyle changed the momentum of the series (We still lost the series, but that series is over quicker without Carkner). You can see how the team 'grew an inch' after. The team magically went from being overwhelmed physically to matching the Rangers hit-for-hit, maybe even surpassing them.
Fighting has a magical effect on a team. How can I argue with that?
Why aren't the Sens fighting 10 seconds into each game to gain the momentum?
Fighting has a magical effect on a team. How can I argue with that?
lol?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Filips Tuba
Why aren't the Sens fighting 10 seconds into each game to gain the momentum?
Is this a round-a-bout way to even attempt at debating whether the Carkner-Boyle incident had momentum changing effects? I'm not sure you want to have that debate. Every Sens fan on here was raving about how that moment changed the rest of the game, where were you? Lamenting the scratching of Gilroy for Carkner?
Also, your last point isn't remotely related to the topic at hand, but there are instances when fights occur within the first 10 seconds of a game to gain, "momentum".
Is this a round-a-bout way to even attempt at debating whether the Carkner-Boyle incident had momentum changing effects? I'm not sure you want to have that debate. Every Sens fan on here was raving about how that moment changed the rest of the game, where were you? Lamenting the scratching of Gilroy for Carkner?
Also, your last point isn't remotely related to the topic at hand, but there are instances when fights occur within the first 10 seconds of a game to gain, "momentum".
People see a fight and if a positve outcome follows they attribute the fight with importance, they forget all the fights that lead to negative outcomes.
People see a fight and if a positve outcome follows they attribute the fight with importance, they forget all the fights that lead to negative outcomes.
50% of the time it works every-time, right?
That is because fights are supposed to create momentum shifts and if they are picked at inopportune times then that momentum can actually work against the team. Back in 2009 the Flyers were killing the Penguins in the playoffs, then Carcillo picked a fight against Talbot when they didn't need momentum and it brought the penguins back into the series. That momentum shift actually played a big role in Pittsburgh winning the series. Essentially Talbot getting into a fight created a positive momentum shift for the Penguins.
The important thing is to have fighters on the team (or players who are simply willing to fight) that fight at the right times or for the right reasons. Carkner fighting Boyle did in fact inspire the team to compete harder, it helped boost their confidence.
Now team toughness isn't only about fighting. That appears to be a big misconception in this forum. Team toughness is about being tough to play against both physically and mentally. A tough team has sufficient amount of nastiness in the lineup. They have players that hit hard and are relentless while also trying to agitate the opposition. We saw this, this year in the playoffs with LA's relentless forechecking.
My biggest concern about team toughness for the sens is that we lack mean and nasty players. Our players, while having decent size and some having decent grit, are simply too nice. Any time Neil is out of the lineup, we stop hitting and if we are down by a couple of goals we don't have anyone to generate a momentum shift with a big hit or a fight. Like I have said before, we need more players like Neil.
The good thing is that we have players in the system to help supplement that physicality that Neil brings. We have skilled players who are also decent hitters like Zibanejad, Noesen and Stone. Then we have some nasty players like Gryba, Borowiecki, Blood, Dziurzynski and Kramer.
Then we have some nasty players like Gryba, Borowiecki, Blood, Dziurzynski and Kramer.
Agreed with the rest of your post, but I wanted to ask, is DD really someone that could be considered 'nasty' tho? I've never heard him described that way, sometimes I think people associate DD in that category just because he's big. Admittedly, I've only seen DD play once or twice, and he didn't stand out to me. Seemed like a normal 4th line center..
Agreed with the rest of your post, but I wanted to ask, is DD really someone that could be considered 'nasty' tho? I've never heard him described that way, sometimes I think people associate DD in that category just because he's big. Admittedly, I've only seen DD play once or twice, and he didn't stand out to me. Seemed like a normal 4th line center..
From what I have seen of him, I find that he is pretty comparable to Curtiss Glencross. Nasty may not be the best way to describe him, but he is a pretty big hitter who hits a lot and has has shown a willingness to fight. Overall he is a fairly tough player to play against.
I guess I will post some infos coming from one of my other posts here too
Cowen is tougher than Kuba (Cowen for now is the one who will replace Kuba's minutes)
Methot is tougher than Cowen (compared to last year when Cowen was a rookie)
Lundin might be as tough as Leeroy
Borowiecki is not soft and he will play as the 7th D-man instead of Carkner
Defense is tougher and better defensively (which was a weakness last year)
======================
Latendresse hits as much as Foligno
Foligno had 78 hits in 61 games in 2009-10 (although he started to hit more last year)
Foligno had 157 hits in 78 games in 2009-10 (his last healthy season)
That's more hits per game. Latendresse has a big body (bigger body and won't get pushed around)
I guess I will post some infos coming from one of my other posts here too
Cowen is tougher than Kuba (Cowen for now is the one who will replace Kuba's minutes)
Methot is tougher than Cowen (compared to last year when Cowen was a rookie)
Lundin might be as tough as Leeroy
Borowiecki is not soft and he will play as the 7th D-man instead of Carkner
Defense is tougher and better defensively (which was a weakness last year)
======================
Latendresse hits as much as Foligno
Foligno had 78 hits in 61 games in 2009-10 (although he started to hit more last year)
Foligno had 157 hits in 78 games in 2009-10 (his last healthy season)
That's more hits per game. Latendresse has a big body (bigger body and won't get pushed around)
