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

Enforcer philosophy - Canucks vs Wings

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
01-08-2012, 07:24 PM
  #1
TacitEndorsement
Registered User
 
TacitEndorsement's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Calgary
Posts: 1,341
vCash: 500
Enforcer philosophy - Canucks vs Wings

The 'do we need an enforcer' debate is pretty hot right now with the Boston game spinning out of control yet again. I am of the opinion that we do.

My Canuck and NHL brethren counter with the Detroit Red Wing model. Detroit does not have and does not need an enforcer.

My counter is that they are a different team. Detroit does not ice a lineup full of agitators. They are widely respected around the league by both players and more importantly officials. They do not play a game which would bring on a physical response. Detroit goes about their business, plays their skill game, and stays away from the physical antics.

Vancouver plays a similar skill game but look at the lineup. Full of players who piss off the opposition. their latest call up, Mike Duco. Those kind of tactics will invite a physical response and the referees are more likely to allow it in my opinion.

Agree? Disagree?

TacitEndorsement is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-08-2012, 07:26 PM
  #2
AmazingNuck
Registered User
 
AmazingNuck's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Vancouver
Posts: 2,130
vCash: 500
If you add an enforcer then you take away time from somebody who can actually play the game. Unfortunately we've got the Sedins who take the brunt of the punishment but they are not effective at standing up for themselves and they play the most minutes. An enforcer is only useful if he's on the ice.

AmazingNuck is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-08-2012, 07:29 PM
  #3
Crows*
 
Crows*'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Vancouver
Country: Canada
Posts: 9,307
vCash: 500
The canucks don't need an enforcer, they need a big tough guy that can play and play decent minutes in the playoffs. not 3 minutes.

Chris Neil would be ideal, but with Ottawa playing well and looking to push for a playoff spot, I don't see how the canucks could add him.

BTW he scores his 6th goal tonight.

I hope the canucks add someone like Neil at the deadline.

Crows* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-08-2012, 07:29 PM
  #4
VanEric
Registered User
 
VanEric's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Vancouver
Country: Canada
Posts: 14,344
vCash: 500
I think they simply called up Duco because it's Florida and he was playing well at the time.

VanEric is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-08-2012, 07:29 PM
  #5
luongo321
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 10,560
vCash: 500
i wish the sedins could fight like iginla.

luongo321 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-08-2012, 07:32 PM
  #6
metric
Registered User
 
metric's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,532
vCash: 500
That's why I wanted Asham the past two years when he was UFA. We need those middleweights that can play and drop them if necessary. Boston really only has one plug/enforcer and that's Thornton. And Thornton isn't even entirely a plug/enforcer. All of their other toughness are guys that can play but will fight.

Honestly I was quite disappointed with Bieksa yesterday during the fight (not going to get into his lazy ass plays again). He's one of the guys on our team that can throw em. Probably not the best to fight Lucic but the optics didn't look great. Yeah, he gets into the scrum a bit but Lucic puts him into a headlock and he doesn't even react. I even remember him still with his gloves on. At the end it was good since we got the two-man advantage without Bieksa getting a penalty but I would have liked him to do something.


Last edited by metric: 01-08-2012 at 07:37 PM.
metric is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-08-2012, 07:32 PM
  #7
TacitEndorsement
Registered User
 
TacitEndorsement's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Calgary
Posts: 1,341
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Crows View Post
The canucks don't need an enforcer, they need a big tough guy that can play and play decent minutes in the playoffs. not 3 minutes.

Chris Neil would be ideal, but with Ottawa playing well and looking to push for a playoff spot, I don't see how the canucks could add him.

BTW he scores his 6th goal tonight.

I hope the canucks add someone like Neil at the deadline.
I think we have a desire for the same player, I just define it as maybe "today's enforcer". Somebody like Thornton, Eager, Jackman, Rupp, etc. Not an Orr or a Godard so to speak.

TacitEndorsement is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-08-2012, 07:33 PM
  #8
ThereGoesVirtanen
#53...the future
 
ThereGoesVirtanen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Port Coquitlam, BC
Country: Canada
Posts: 10,557
vCash: 500
We need a player that can intimidate physically and play the game.

Those players do not grow on trees. We had one in Torres but let him go.

ThereGoesVirtanen is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-08-2012, 07:35 PM
  #9
TacitEndorsement
Registered User
 
TacitEndorsement's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Calgary
Posts: 1,341
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by SDK View Post
We need a player that can intimidate physically and play the game.

Those players do not grow on trees. We had one in Torres but let him go.
I don't think Torres is the guy. He is a fearsome hitter but he is not scary in the least after the whistle. During a full line scrum like the one in the Boston game Torres does no damage, he helps nobody.

TacitEndorsement is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-08-2012, 07:47 PM
  #10
opendoor
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 8,890
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by ganja View Post
The 'do we need an enforcer' debate is pretty hot right now with the Boston game spinning out of control yet again. I am of the opinion that we do.

My Canuck and NHL brethren counter with the Detroit Red Wing model. Detroit does not have and does not need an enforcer.

My counter is that they are a different team. Detroit does not ice a lineup full of agitators. They are widely respected around the league by both players and more importantly officials. They do not play a game which would bring on a physical response. Detroit goes about their business, plays their skill game, and stays away from the physical antics.

Vancouver plays a similar skill game but look at the lineup. Full of players who piss off the opposition. their latest call up, Mike Duco. Those kind of tactics will invite a physical response and the referees are more likely to allow it in my opinion.

Agree? Disagree?
What effect would a 4th line enforcer have on any of that? He won't cause refs to call games tighter, won't prevent games from spiraling out of control, nor would he prevent other teams from going after Canucks players.

opendoor is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
01-08-2012, 07:51 PM
  #11
Bam19
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 224
vCash: 500
We don't need a goon who plays sub 5 minutes a game and will never have an impact other than fighting the other teams good who plays sub 5 minutes that type of toughness is extremely useless. We need guys who can play a decent game, chip in goals, forcheck/hit like crazy and can drop them if needed. These guys are very hard to find an really have to be developed.

I do think we need one more of those guys as we already have Lappy who makes are 4th line respectable.

Top Choices (not that i'm saying any are available or in any particular order)

Ryan Clowe
Brandon Prust
David Clarkson
Tim Jackman
Steve Ott
Wayne Simmonds
Matt Martin
Derek Dorsett
Steve Downie
Chris Neil

Obviously some are better than others, and realistically none of these guys may be available but this is what we need.

Bam19 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-08-2012, 07:53 PM
  #12
Drop the Sopel
Feaster famine
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: calgary
Posts: 16,305
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by ganja View Post
Vancouver plays a similar skill game but look at the lineup. Full of players who piss off the opposition. their latest call up, Mike Duco. Those kind of tactics will invite a physical response and the referees are more likely to allow it in my opinion.

Agree? Disagree?
I'm not a fan of 'enforcers' but do agree with what you're saying. The Canucks have a lot of guys that get under the opposition's skin but not a lot of guys that can drop the gloves when games turn ugly. Maybe not the ideal composition.

I have always been opposed to bringing in tough, undisciplined players but am starting to think PP opportunities for and against will always be similar, regardless of the makeup of the team or whether we add a Downie or not. The only difference is, the officials would call the obvious, blatant infractions of a Downie while calling 1 less borderline hook on Henrik Sedin. It seems regardless of our roster we're a top 5 penalized team every season...

If Gillis does his homework and thinks Downie wouldn't be a bad teammate he's the ideal 'tough' guy to bring in IMO. He has good hockey sense, is a pass first player(something we could use another one of), showed very well in the playoffs last year, has yet to hit his prime and as an RFA at season's end could be retained longterm at a reasonable salary. Similar to a valuable player in Steve Ott but probably more offensive upside there.

Drop the Sopel is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-08-2012, 07:55 PM
  #13
Ched Brosky
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Vancouver
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,881
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bam19 View Post
We don't need a goon who plays sub 5 minutes a game and will never have an impact other than fighting the other teams good who plays sub 5 minutes that type of toughness is extremely useless. We need guys who can play a decent game, chip in goals, forcheck/hit like crazy and can drop them if needed. These guys are very hard to find an really have to be developed.

I do think we need one more of those guys as we already have Lappy who makes are 4th line respectable.

Top Choices (not that i'm saying any are available or in any particular order)

Ryan Clowe
Brandon Prust
David Clarkson
Tim Jackman
Steve Ott

Wayne Simmonds
Matt Martin
Derek Dorsett

Steve Downie
Chris Neil

Obviously some are better than others, and realistically none of these guys may be available but this is what we need.
Those are the players I'd want the most out of the group because they won't cost an arm and a leg to get and have relatively low salaries and won't ever need huge raises

Ched Brosky is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-08-2012, 08:01 PM
  #14
BLAME CANADA*
The Canucks did it
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 5,696
vCash: 500
The only team we need one is if we play the Bruins outside of them there is no one else that can really push us around like that.

BLAME CANADA* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-08-2012, 08:06 PM
  #15
Crows*
 
Crows*'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Vancouver
Country: Canada
Posts: 9,307
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by BLAME CANADA View Post
The only team we need one is if we play the Bruins outside of them there is no one else that can really push us around like that.
That's actually a really good point.

I don't see Gillis adding a tough guy just in case we play the bruins again.

Crows* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-08-2012, 08:06 PM
  #16
Transom Bob
Registered User
 
Transom Bob's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Vancouver
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,057
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by metric View Post
That's why I wanted Asham the past two years when he was UFA. We need those middleweights that can play and drop them if necessary. Boston really only has one plug/enforcer and that's Thornton. And Thornton isn't even entirely a plug/enforcer. All of their other toughness are guys that can play but will fight.

Honestly I was quite disappointed with Bieksa yesterday during the fight (not going to get into his lazy ass plays again). He's one of the guys on our team that can throw em. Probably not the best to fight Lucic but the optics didn't look great. Yeah, he gets into the scrum a bit but Lucic puts him into a headlock and he doesn't even react. I even remember him still with his gloves on. At the end it was good since we got the two-man advantage without Bieksa getting a penalty but I would have liked him to do something.
I hate this logic. Absolutely hate it. Bieksa logged more icetime than any other player in the Bos/Van game. He picked up 2 assists while on the powerplay. What good does it do the Canucks if he is in the penalty box? I understand that you as a fan want to see vengeance but it does us absolutely no good if Juice gets a misconduct. The Canucks won that game the moment they decided to play whistle to whistle and cut out the macho crap. The only time a player of his calibre should justify fighting is when the opposing player is a skilled player (ie Iginla)

I'd love to have a Milan Lucic type player on the Canucks.(as all teams would) Someone who can score goals, hit hard and fight if need be. Enforcers are friggin useless. Matt cooke (a notorious cheapshot artist) only had 3 fights last year. Enforcers can't go after the pests in the NHL. They just fight other fighters. What's the point?

Transom Bob is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-08-2012, 08:10 PM
  #17
TacitEndorsement
Registered User
 
TacitEndorsement's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Calgary
Posts: 1,341
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by opendoor View Post
What effect would a 4th line enforcer have on any of that? He won't cause refs to call games tighter, won't prevent games from spiraling out of control, nor would he prevent other teams from going after Canucks players.
It wouldn't stop them from going after the Canucks but when they do he can respond. Look at Thornton and Weise. Thornton was put out there to challenge the Canucks and they had no response for him. What do you think that does to a bench? Thornton can basically make every Canuck his b**** and not have to worry about any consequences.

TacitEndorsement is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-08-2012, 08:13 PM
  #18
TacitEndorsement
Registered User
 
TacitEndorsement's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Calgary
Posts: 1,341
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Taco Fingerhat View Post
I'd love to have a Milan Lucic type player on the Canucks.(as all teams would) Someone who can score goals, hit hard and fight if need be. Enforcers are friggin useless. Matt cooke (a notorious cheapshot artist) only had 3 fights last year. Enforcers can't go after the pests in the NHL. They just fight other fighters. What's the point?
Matt Cooke isn't an enforcer so I'm not sure why you are lumping him into that category. Enforcers don't just fight other fighters. Nathan Horton was running around, Milan Lucic runs around, Zdeno Chara challenges everybody. There are good players that have some fight in them and we have nobody to match them physically.

The beauty of having Willie Mitchell to me was when Vancouver played Calgary they had somebody to match Jarome Iginla physically. Without him I felt like Jarome would dominate our squad. Mattias Ohlund did he very best until Willie came but it wasn't enough.

TacitEndorsement is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-08-2012, 08:20 PM
  #19
Shareefruck
Registered User
 
Shareefruck's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Vancouver, BC
Country: Canada
Posts: 17,437
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Crows View Post
That's actually a really good point.

I don't see Gillis adding a tough guy just in case we play the bruins again.
On the other hand, do you really see any Eastern team getting past the Bruins this year?
Quote:
Originally Posted by ganja View Post
It wouldn't stop them from going after the Canucks but when they do he can respond. Look at Thornton and Weise. Thornton was put out there to challenge the Canucks and they had no response for him. What do you think that does to a bench? Thornton can basically make every Canuck his b**** and not have to worry about any consequences.
Am I the only one here that feels it's absolutely bush-league that, even with a rule-book that's supposedly supposed to stop people from doing this, we still feel this way?

Shareefruck is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-08-2012, 08:22 PM
  #20
metric
Registered User
 
metric's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,532
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Taco Fingerhat View Post
I hate this logic. Absolutely hate it. Bieksa logged more icetime than any other player in the Bos/Van game. He picked up 2 assists while on the powerplay. What good does it do the Canucks if he is in the penalty box? I understand that you as a fan want to see vengeance but it does us absolutely no good if Juice gets a misconduct. The Canucks won that game the moment they decided to play whistle to whistle and cut out the macho crap. The only time a player of his calibre should justify fighting is when the opposing player is a skilled player (ie Iginla)
I said at the end of the day it was a good thing he didn't fight but it still looks bad. And I didn't want him to fight necessarily but do more than just let yourself be put into a headlock. I know he was in a scrum and Lucic jumped in but Bieksa didn't even try to get out of it. And sometimes taking a penalty is worth it especially when all the talk before the game was about how the big bad Bruins just physically man handled the Canucks constantly.

Anyways what's happened has happened. Nothing to do about it.

metric is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-08-2012, 08:28 PM
  #21
Slashy McSlewfoot
Registered User
 
Slashy McSlewfoot's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 2,027
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by ganja View Post
The 'do we need an enforcer' debate is pretty hot right now with the Boston game spinning out of control yet again. I am of the opinion that we do.

My Canuck and NHL brethren counter with the Detroit Red Wing model. Detroit does not have and does not need an enforcer.

My counter is that they are a different team. Detroit does not ice a lineup full of agitators. They are widely respected around the league by both players and more importantly officials. They do not play a game which would bring on a physical response. Detroit goes about their business, plays their skill game, and stays away from the physical antics.

Vancouver plays a similar skill game but look at the lineup. Full of players who piss off the opposition. their latest call up, Mike Duco. Those kind of tactics will invite a physical response and the referees are more likely to allow it in my opinion.

Agree? Disagree?
Excellent point regarding the Canucks vs. the Wings. So many times when the subject of toughness is brought up, without fail somebody will mention Detroit as a reason why Vancouver doesn't need toughness. It drives me nuts. I know Gillis has mentions a "Detroit model" but the fact is the teams are quite different. The main difference, as you stated, is Detroit gets respect from league and it's players that Vancouver will most likely never get.

I've always felt if Gillis could add a player or two that can play and provide toughness the team would be better for it. Of course, players like that are hard to come by and are expensive to aquire. I also don't feel players like this are only needed for the Bruins - there are plenty of teams around the league that dislike the Canucks and more and more often you see opposing teams play the Canucks "tough" and occasionally dirty.

Though besides adding new players, I still think a small part of the problem is the attitude/philosophy of the team. The team isn't a soft team, but they do seem a little too reliant on waiting for the refs to give them the calls, even when it becomes obvious they aren't going to get them. Whether they like it or not they will probably never be respected the way the Wings are, so there comes a point where you stop crying to the refs and start taking matters into your own hands. I said in another thread instead of the team constantly whining about non-calls and abuse on the ice, adapt and take advantage of the fact that the league will let some of the rough stuff go. Diving or waiting for PP's isn't always going to work, as we saw in the SCF.

Slashy McSlewfoot is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-08-2012, 08:30 PM
  #22
Transom Bob
Registered User
 
Transom Bob's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Vancouver
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,057
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by ganja View Post
Matt Cooke isn't an enforcer so I'm not sure why you are lumping him into that category. Enforcers don't just fight other fighters. Nathan Horton was running around, Milan Lucic runs around, Zdeno Chara challenges everybody. There are good players that have some fight in them and we have nobody to match them physically.

The beauty of having Willie Mitchell to me was when Vancouver played Calgary they had somebody to match Jarome Iginla physically. Without him I felt like Jarome would dominate our squad. Mattias Ohlund did he very best until Willie came but it wasn't enough.
No. Cooke isn't an enforcer. That's my point. So if an enforcer cannot fight a pest, then what are they good for? Fighting other enforcers. So if you have a team without an enforcer, the other team has dressed a useless player who is going to run around and most likely get penalized in one form or the other.
Now if you are talking about having physically strong players who can deliver bone crushing hits within a game, and can also score, than yes, I want those guys on my team. But they are pretty hard to find in todays NHL.

Transom Bob is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-08-2012, 08:33 PM
  #23
Transom Bob
Registered User
 
Transom Bob's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Vancouver
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,057
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by metric View Post
I said at the end of the day it was a good thing he didn't fight but it still looks bad. And I didn't want him to fight necessarily but do more than just let yourself be put into a headlock. I know he was in a scrum and Lucic jumped in but Bieksa didn't even try to get out of it. And sometimes taking a penalty is worth it especially when all the talk before the game was about how the big bad Bruins just physically man handled the Canucks constantly.

Anyways what's happened has happened. Nothing to do about it.
I have no problem getting physically manhandled by Boston every game. I do however have a problem with getting physically manhandled by Boston every game and losing the Stanley Cup. So the win meant more for me than the physicality.

Transom Bob is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-08-2012, 08:36 PM
  #24
opendoor
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 8,890
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by ganja View Post
It wouldn't stop them from going after the Canucks but when they do he can respond. Look at Thornton and Weise. Thornton was put out there to challenge the Canucks and they had no response for him. What do you think that does to a bench? Thornton can basically make every Canuck his b**** and not have to worry about any consequences.
And Thornton also put his team down two men by going after Burrows, basically gifting the Canucks the opening goal. Which had a bigger impact on the game?

opendoor is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
01-08-2012, 08:36 PM
  #25
TacitEndorsement
Registered User
 
TacitEndorsement's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Calgary
Posts: 1,341
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Taco Fingerhat View Post
No. Cooke isn't an enforcer. That's my point. So if an enforcer cannot fight a pest, then what are they good for? Fighting other enforcers. So if you have a team without an enforcer, the other team has dressed a useless player who is going to run around and most likely get penalized in one form or the other.
Now if you are talking about having physically strong players who can deliver bone crushing hits within a game, and can also score, than yes, I want those guys on my team. But they are pretty hard to find in todays NHL.
Pests are not our problem.

TacitEndorsement 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 04:18 PM.

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

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2015, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. 2015 All Rights Reserved.