GMRwings1983

Do giraffes live that long?

You didn't say anything about Downey in your last post. It was about as analytical as an episode of Jersey Shore. There was nothing substantive to respond to. This post is a little better, since it actually has a sentence that mentions the topic. No one is angry with Downey being waived. Making educated complaints is not the same thing as being angry. Also, no one is surprised that he was waived. We're just defending the argument that there is a place for enforcers in the NHL, even the pure enforcers with limited skills. If you're not convinced as to strength of our argument, then that's no surprise either. No one ever changes their mind after a debate on LGW. The spirit of a debate is why we come here. That's all this topic was about, until you decided to turn it into some finger pointing contest.

I didn't say every team. I said most teams. Most teams do carry a pure enforcer.

Your man hate for me is amazing. You probably have a lot more people on this site who dislike you than those who dislike me. There's a reason for that, and posts like the one you just made are perfect example as to why. Nothing analytical at all about your post. Totally off topic and self righteous. Funny thing is that I've posted less in this thread than any other pro-enforcer people. Probably some pathetic attempt to start a flame war. I ought to have my head examined for even responding to it. Oh, and I am a bad person, so you got that wrong too.

It's not. I'm just refuting the arguments people make about how enforcers are obsolete nowadays, despite the fact that just about every team has a pure goon that doesn't have much skill, and takes playing time away from those in the minors with more talent. The Wings did the same with May and Downey in recent history. Apparently, some of posters here think they're smarter than most GM's in the NHL on this issue.

I can name you a lot of pure enforcers, and would name you most teams, but that would take way too long. Besides, you know who they are, so what's the point? The game has changed, but that doesn't mean teams have totally stopped using pure enforcers. Otherwise, guys like Godard, Orr, Boogaard, Shelley, Belak, Parros, Janssen, Barch, Thornton, McGrattan, Hordichuk, etc. wouldn't have a job in the NHL these last few years. I don't think every GM in the league is dumb. When these types of players that I listed above totally disappear from the NHL, then I'll join your position. Every team has a 4th liner in the minors, who is more talented than their enforcers. That doesn't prevent them from dressing those tough guys. We've done it before too. It's honestly not that radical an idea.

So this means we should kill the Leafs, right?

If pure enforcers are useless nowadays, how come just about every team seems to dress one? Yeah, they're playing limited minutes, but that has always been the case with pure enforcers, even back in the 80's and 90's. They've always been 4th liners. That doesn't make someone useless, just because they're on the 4th line.

Good ******* riddance.

Which of these perennial bottom feeders can actually make the playoffs this year? I think Tampa has the best chance out of all these teams, because they have 3 legitimate superstars, one of whom (Stamkos) has a chance to become one of the very elite players in the league. I can't visually any of these other teams making the playoffs, but you never know. Look what happened with Colorado and Phoenix last year, with their unimpressive rosters. Columbus Blue Jackets Toronto Maple Leafs Atlanta Thrashers New York Islanders Florida Panthers Edmonton Oilers Tampa Bay Lightning

This is exactly what I mean. Where were these posts when Downey was in the lineup? Did the cat get your tongue then?

Anti-enforcer post alert. BTW, to add to your list, Downey was a horrible person who punched babies and strangled elderly women.

I wasn't talking about you in particular. I just don't remember anyone starting a thread talking about how Downey or May should be benched for more useful 4th liners from GR, or something like that.

They looked good on paper last year, too. Doesn't quite work that way. Remember the Rangers early in the last decade. Best team in the league on paper, and hardly ever made the playoffs.

Does anyone have any kind words about Andrew Peters?

So you only complain when the status quo agrees with you? Kind of pointless to post on a message board if you're afraid to share your opinion, even if it conflicts with popular opinion. I just don't remember any of you guys talking about how useless enforcers are when they were in our lineup. You only do it after the fact, and when others agree with you.

How come when we had enforcers on our team, no one was starting threads like "OMG, we need to get rid of Downey and May because they can't score"? Now that we don't have any tough guys, everyone raves about how insignificant those players are to the team. At least be consistent people, instead of resorting to hypocrisy.

Then how do you explain why most teams carry enforcers? And please don't say it's just to sell tickets.

Ah, that explains everything. That Holland is one smart GM, alright.

Does the strength of the division really matter nowadays? Teams don't play 8 games against divisonal opponents anymore, like they were doing several years ago.

Wasn't it Holland who signed Downey and May, and Holland who has advocated enforcers in the past?

There goes the Stanley Cup. We've never won one without a tough guy in the lineup.

Really? You think the Leafs have a chance in hell to make the playoffs?

Ericsson is a big guy with no physicality. Like Uwe Krupp, Maxim Kuznetsov and Yan Golubovsky. He still remains to be proven, unlike those guys, but that's what he looks like so far. Just a big, soft jellyfish.

Him and Drake are different kind of players. Also, the team wanted to help Drake win his first Cup. Modano already has a Cup, so it's not quite the same thing.