HFBoards

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

Oilers sign Darcy Hordichuk (1year/$850k)

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
07-03-2012, 09:38 PM
  #151
Replacement
Now with 9% more zen
 
Replacement's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Hockey Hell
Country: Canada
Posts: 37,331
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ol' Jase View Post
Kyle Clifford would qualify as LA's enforcer, 10 fighting majors this season, 9:24 min/G TOI.
Oh c'mon. Kyle Clifford played a total of 15mins in the entire playoffs this season. There couldn't be a more obscure example. Which actually services my point that the Kings had no need for an enforcer.

My rebuttal is obvious. A poster mentioned the SC winner as proof that enforcers are still required.

If anything the LA Kings demonstrate that the ultimate success can be had without it.

It was a poor example to use. The Kings rely less on enforcers than most teams in the NHL

edit to the edit: Fraser? Seriously? jebus at that rate Sam Gagner is an enforcer.


Last edited by Replacement: 07-03-2012 at 09:43 PM.
Replacement is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-03-2012, 09:42 PM
  #152
ThePhoenixx
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 835
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Replacement View Post
Oh c'mon. Kyle Clifford played a total of 15mins in the entire playoffs this season. There couldn't be a more obscure example. Which actually services my point that the Kings had no need for an enforcer.

My rebuttal is obvious. A poster mentioned the SC winner as proof that enforcers are still required.

If anything the LA Kings demonstrate that the ultimate success can be had without it.

It was a poor example to use. The Kings rely less on enforcers than most teams in the NHL
You just made his point.

Enforcers are used primarily in the regular season, and then see spot duty in the playoffs.

ThePhoenixx is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-03-2012, 09:42 PM
  #153
Ol' Jase
PLAYOFFS??
 
Ol' Jase's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Edmonton
Country: Canada
Posts: 8,769
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Replacement View Post
Oh c'mon. Kyle Clifford played a total of 15mins in the entire playoffs this season. There couldn't be a more obscure example. Which actually services my point that the Kings had no need for an enforcer.

My rebuttal is obvious. A poster mentioned the SC winner as proof that enforcers are still required.

If anything the LA Kings demonstrate that the ultimate success can be had without it.

It was a poor example to use. The Kings rely less on enforcers than most teams in the NHL

edit to the edit: Fraser? Seriously? jebus at that rate Sam Gagner is an enforcer.
How much time would you expect Darcy Hordichuk to see in the playoffs???

You really just made my point for me, maybe better than I did.

Ol' Jase is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-03-2012, 09:46 PM
  #154
Replacement
Now with 9% more zen
 
Replacement's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Hockey Hell
Country: Canada
Posts: 37,331
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by ThePhoenixx View Post
You just made his point.

Enforcers are used primarily in the regular season, and then see spot duty in the playoffs.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ol' Jase View Post
How much time would you expect Darcy Hordichuk to see in the playoffs???

You really just made my point for me, maybe better than I did.
huh?

I'm honestly missing it then. What value do enforcers have as Joe described in contributing to winning the SC, as he described, if they don't even appear in the playoffs?

Think about my rebuttal and what I was actually rebutting to. The false notion that the last 2 SC champs got there on the basis of enforcers.

In any case where are you pulling stats on team fights. NHL is giving me different numbers.

Replacement is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-03-2012, 09:48 PM
  #155
Ol' Jase
PLAYOFFS??
 
Ol' Jase's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Edmonton
Country: Canada
Posts: 8,769
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Replacement View Post
huh?

I'm honestly missing it then. What value do enforcers have as Joe described in contributing to winning the SC, as he described, if they don't even appear in the playoffs?

Think about my rebuttal and what I was actually rebutting to. The false notion that the last 2 SC champs got there on the basis of enforcers.

In any case where are you pulling stats on team fights. NHL is giving me different numbers.
http://espn.go.com/nhl/statistics

Ol' Jase is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-03-2012, 09:52 PM
  #156
Replacement
Now with 9% more zen
 
Replacement's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Hockey Hell
Country: Canada
Posts: 37,331
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ol' Jase View Post


edit, nevermind, found it.

btw not sure what you are saying with the 33 fights to 27 fights comparison. Essentially thats saying that the LA Kings fought only a few times more over the course of a season and were essentially the same in that regard to the Edmonton Oilers. The range of fights in teams went from 15-65. A differential between 27 and 33 is insignificant in that curve. Both the Oilers and Kings were sub median and sub mean in fighting. so what is that actually saying.

If anything the comparison is saying fighting, and enforcement has nothing to do with team success. That it was a statistically meaningless variable.


Last edited by Replacement: 07-03-2012 at 09:59 PM.
Replacement is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-03-2012, 10:00 PM
  #157
ThePhoenixx
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 835
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Replacement View Post
huh?

The false notion that the last 2 SC champs got there on the basis of enforcers.
Who claimed that they got there "on the basis of enforcers."

That is strawmanish, Replacement.

ThePhoenixx is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-03-2012, 10:02 PM
  #158
Replacement
Now with 9% more zen
 
Replacement's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Hockey Hell
Country: Canada
Posts: 37,331
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by ThePhoenixx View Post
Who claimed that they got there "on the basis of enforcers."

That is strawmanish, Replacement.
What do you think Joe Hallenback was referring to in his post 146 which I responded to?

That he made in a thread about enforcers, during a discussion about the value of enforcers.

Strawman? Don't think so.

Joe knew exactly what he was inferring and it has no substantiation. No legs, no evidence.

Replacement is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-03-2012, 10:19 PM
  #159
Joe Hallenback
Registered User
 
Joe Hallenback's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 7,510
vCash: 500
I think the evidence is pretty clear. Teams that are tough can easily win the cup. It is pretty much been proven.

Granted a team like Detroit can win just as well.

I often said on these boards it is up to the GM and Coach to determine what the team needs in order to win. A lot of times what they do is inject toughness into the lineup in order for a team to succeed.

I will just leave this thread with a quote and maybe can understand the way hockey players view the game.


"After being presented with the Stanley Cup in the 1990 final, Mark Messier handed the Cup off to Adam Graves to allow the cup to start making its rounds amongst his teammates. Shortly after the hand off, the captain noticed that Brown, who did not dress in the final game, had made his way down to ice level and was on the Oilers bench. Messier promptly went back into the celebration, took the Cup back and skated it over to the Oilers bench...and placed it directly in Dave Brown's hands. The much loved tough guy was instantly surrounded by all his teammates on the bench and was overcome with emotion. The players reaction was, arguably. even greater then when their captain received the trophy from the commish. While Dave Brown may not have been a crucial performer, when it came to the club bringing home the organizations fifth championship, his presence alone made his teammates march a lot easier and should not be forgotten."

Joe Hallenback is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-03-2012, 10:26 PM
  #160
Replacement
Now with 9% more zen
 
Replacement's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Hockey Hell
Country: Canada
Posts: 37,331
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Joe Hallenback View Post
I think the evidence is pretty clear. Teams that are tough can easily win the cup. It is pretty much been proven.

Granted a team like Detroit can win just as well.

I often said on these boards it is up to the GM and Coach to determine what the team needs in order to win. A lot of times what they do is inject toughness into the lineup in order for a team to succeed.

I will just leave this thread with a quote and maybe can understand the way hockey players view the game.
The Kings were my favorite team going into the playoffs. I called them to win the SC after the first game of the Nucks series. That team was team tough loaded to play playoff hockey. I understand that argument. But it has nothing at all to do with enforcers.


Quote:
"After being presented with the Stanley Cup in the 1990 final, Mark Messier handed the Cup off to Adam Graves to allow the cup to start making its rounds amongst his teammates. Shortly after the hand off, the captain noticed that Brown, who did not dress in the final game, had made his way down to ice level and was on the Oilers bench. Messier promptly went back into the celebration, took the Cup back and skated it over to the Oilers bench...and placed it directly in Dave Brown's hands. The much loved tough guy was instantly surrounded by all his teammates on the bench and was overcome with emotion. The players reaction was, arguably. even greater then when their captain received the trophy from the commish. While Dave Brown may not have been a crucial performer, when it came to the club bringing home the organizations fifth championship, his presence alone made his teammates march a lot easier and should not be forgotten."
Thats from a different era when enforcers had value, meant something to team, results, and games, and when they mattered. Plus that Gretzky put front center what Dave Semenko meant to him at the time so the precedent was set. It was a different game, different rules back then.

The league has changed a whole lot since then.

I doubt anybody on the Kings was skating the cup over to Kyle Clifford..

Replacement is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-03-2012, 10:32 PM
  #161
PepsiFiend
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Country: Canada
Posts: 772
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Replacement View Post
Oh c'mon. Kyle Clifford played a total of 15mins in the entire playoffs this season. There couldn't be a more obscure example. Which actually services my point that the Kings had no need for an enforcer.

My rebuttal is obvious. A poster mentioned the SC winner as proof that enforcers are still required.

If anything the LA Kings demonstrate that the ultimate success can be had without it.

It was a poor example to use. The Kings rely less on enforcers than most teams in the NHL

edit to the edit: Fraser? Seriously? jebus at that rate Sam Gagner is an enforcer.
Wasn't Clifford injured in the Vancouver series though? that would explain his lack of minutes.

PepsiFiend is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-03-2012, 10:38 PM
  #162
Replacement
Now with 9% more zen
 
Replacement's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Hockey Hell
Country: Canada
Posts: 37,331
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by PepsiFiend View Post
Wasn't Clifford injured in the Vancouver series though? that would explain his lack of minutes.
He played limited minutes in 2 games in the Phoenix series and was never heard from again. He played 15mins in 3 games in the playoffs total. Just no need whatsoever for him.

Replacement is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-03-2012, 10:54 PM
  #163
UnrefinedCrude
Registered User
 
UnrefinedCrude's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,021
vCash: 833
teams that play scared, the Oilers for example, invariably get pushed around.

teams that ply tough push others around, see how we got our ***** kicked by a terrible Calgary Flames for the last few years.

there will always be the occasional undeterable cheapshot, but tougher teams face far less of a grinding beatdown.

hockey is a contact sport,teams that play nice get destroyed teams that push te edge tend to get away with almost all of it.

UnrefinedCrude is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-03-2012, 11:02 PM
  #164
nye
Registered User
 
nye's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Siberia
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,887
vCash: 500
I believe the toughness of the team has an impact on how the skill players play the game.

If RNH and Eberle look down the bench and see they are the toughest on the team it will have an impact on how they play.

Ideally you have guys like Lucic for a tough guy and most of your players are large and can take care of themselves, and their smaller super-stars when needed.

The Oilers do not have near enough of it (toughness). I believe that players like Hordichuk and Eager, that the Oilers do have, being stapled to the bench when the situation calls for them to be on the ice has an impact on the play of the skilled players, and their health.

nye is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-03-2012, 11:15 PM
  #165
NAF
Beauty Fakes
 
NAF's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,887
vCash: 590
nvrmind


Last edited by NAF: 07-03-2012 at 11:48 PM.
NAF is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-04-2012, 07:06 AM
  #166
Moose Coleman
Registered User
 
Moose Coleman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Posts: 3,892
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Joe Hallenback View Post
I think the evidence is pretty clear. Teams that are tough can easily win the cup. It is pretty much been proven.
But we're not talking about "teams that are tough" here: we're talking about designated enforcer/tough guy types. If goons are so important to team success, why don't they play when it matters most. IMO team toughness and enforcers are two separate things.

Now Hordichuk is probably a better hockey player than many of his ilk, but my concern is that if he does get a longer leash and more time on the ice, he'll end up costing the team either through dumb penalties or simply by being crap at hockey.

Moose Coleman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-04-2012, 07:53 AM
  #167
Hoogaar23
Registered User
 
Hoogaar23's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 1,471
vCash: 500
I don't like playing the "have you ever played hockey" card - but for those that have not played at a pretty high level (junior or above), there's not really much we can do to convince you that these guys do make a difference.

You can point to stats and examples of this, that and the other thing. But I can tell you that when we had a tough guy or 2 on our bench, we felt more at ease letting loose. When we didn't and the other team did, we were quite a bit more subdued. I may not even be articulating that properly. But I can tell you with 100% certainty that having an agitator in the game has an impact on SOME people. I'm sure some guys are not affected at all one way or the other, but I am 100% certain that SOME guys are - for better or worse.

And I think some people have changed the conversation here - Hordichuk is not really an "enforcer" like a Laraque or MacIntyre. He's a pest/agitator, and a bit of a nut. And THAT to me is even more effective. If he goes crazy you just don't know what he's going to do or to whom. That's scarier - much scarier - than someone like Laraque sending out an RSVP.

Hoogaar23 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-04-2012, 08:00 AM
  #168
I am the Liquor
Registered User
 
I am the Liquor's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Sunnyvale
Country: Canada
Posts: 34,444
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hoogaar23 View Post
I don't like playing the "have you ever played hockey" card - but for those that have not played at a pretty high level (junior or above), there's not really much we can do to convince you that these guys do make a difference.

You can point to stats and examples of this, that and the other thing. But I can tell you that when we had a tough guy or 2 on our bench, we felt more at ease letting loose. When we didn't and the other team did, we were quite a bit more subdued. I may not even be articulating that properly. But I can tell you with 100% certainty that having an agitator in the game has an impact on SOME people. I'm sure some guys are not affected at all one way or the other, but I am 100% certain that SOME guys are - for better or worse.

And I think some people have changed the conversation here - Hordichuk is not really an "enforcer" like a Laraque or MacIntyre. He's a pest/agitator, and a bit of a nut. And THAT to me is even more effective. If he goes crazy you just don't know what he's going to do or to whom. That's scarier - much scarier - than someone like Laraque sending out an RSVP.
This really nails it. Big and even big and tough is one thing. Big and tough AND crazy is a whole different kettle of fish.

I am the Liquor is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-04-2012, 08:26 AM
  #169
cheesed-off*
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Under your skin...
Posts: 3,123
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ol' Jase View Post
How much time would you expect Darcy Hordichuk to see in the playoffs???
Hordichuk played zero minutes this playoffs. I repeat - zero !

cheesed-off* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-04-2012, 09:12 AM
  #170
ca phe sua da
Why not Zoidberg?
 
ca phe sua da's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,048
vCash: 1087
now I come to think about it... the great Oilers' teams in the '80s didn't have an enforcer either



ca phe sua da is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-04-2012, 09:37 AM
  #171
MeestaDeteta
Registered User
 
MeestaDeteta's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Saskazoo
Posts: 7,625
vCash: 500
Enforcers such as Godard, MacIntyre, etc. who are only on the ice for 2 mins a game have very limited value. Guys who can skate, hit & also fight when the need arises are still of value in this league. I think Hordichuk falls more into the second category, he may not have much offense, but he can keep up with the play, back check, throw hits and drop the mitts if necessary.

MeestaDeteta is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-04-2012, 09:39 AM
  #172
Ramrod
Happily outscoring
 
Ramrod's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Schremp since 2000
Posts: 1,305
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by cheesed-off View Post
Hordichuk played zero minutes this playoffs. I repeat - zero !
No wonder his team didn't win the cup.

Ramrod is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-04-2012, 10:04 AM
  #173
hockeyaddict101
Registered User
 
hockeyaddict101's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 19,905
vCash: 500
Look having a guy like Hordichuk is not going to prevent all injuries and is not going to prevent Hall from getting run. That is obviously a ridiculous argument.

What it does do is have a guy that is not scared to get in the grill of another teams star players or punish a player if he does decide to run Taylor Hall. You need a coach willing to put him out to do so though.

Hordichuk is a good enough player that Krueger can trust him to put him out enough to actually do his job.

hockeyaddict101 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-04-2012, 10:09 AM
  #174
Cerebral
Registered User
 
Cerebral's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Calgary, Alberta
Country: Canada
Posts: 21,706
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by hockeyaddict101 View Post
Look having a guy like Hordichuk is not going to prevent all injuries and is not going to prevent Hall from getting run. That is obviously a ridiculous argument.

What it does do is have a guy that is not scared to get in the grill of another teams star players or punish a player if he does decide to run Taylor Hall. You need a coach willing to put him out to do so though.

Hordichuk is a good enough player that Krueger can trust him to put him out enough to actually do his job.
I think most importantly, Hordichuk is a guy who won't whine if he sits in the pressbox for a majority of the season and only sees the ice for 5-10 minutes a night.

We don't want our prospects in a situation like that so it helps to have a veteran like Hordichuk who is also a positive force in the dressing room.

__________________
Burn Girl Prom Queen
Cerebral is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-04-2012, 10:41 AM
  #175
guymez
The Seldom Seen Kid
 
guymez's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Calgary
Country: Canada
Posts: 12,219
vCash: 162
Quote:
Originally Posted by hockeyaddict101 View Post
Look having a guy like Hordichuk is not going to prevent all injuries and is not going to prevent Hall from getting run. That is obviously a ridiculous argument.

What it does do is have a guy that is not scared to get in the grill of another teams star players or punish a player if he does decide to run Taylor Hall. You need a coach willing to put him out to do so though.

Hordichuk is a good enough player that Krueger can trust him to put him out enough to actually do his job.
The problem with this argument is that Hordichuk isn't a good enough player to be on the ice with the other teams star players.
He would get burned.


As for the rest of this discussion its gone completely off the rails. Reading through some of the posts and my position (along with a few others) has been completely misrepresented.

Firstly we have posters comparing Hordichuk to Lucic which is ridiculous because Lucic can play the game at a high level....Hordi can't.

Then we have posters referencing the 1980's as justification as to why teams need a 4th line tough guy. Different era...its like suggesting goalies should be using a stand up style because Grant Fuhr was outstanding in the 80's.

Not being a fan of players like Hordichuk does not mean that you are anti-toughness. It just means that the value of a tough guy that is only good enough to play reduced minutes on the 4th line is minimal at best.

Functional toughness has value. A player that has the skillset (like Lucic) to play in the top 6 against the other teams best players has value.

Maintaining a roster spot for a player of marginal skills such as Hordichuk doesn't make a team better.

guymez 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 04:57 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.